The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCED Planning File� , __ _.. _,. _- -- -__ _____ ._ __ _ ._ _ _----- _ ____. ._--- - - _. _ . __ � RENTON PAA : EAST HIGHLANDS �� :1� EAST HIGHLANDS AT A GIANCE: r - _ _ __ � � Land area (acres) 2,0�)1 � - i � East Highlands PAA 2005 Estimated Population 7,287 ! ' I 2005 Taxable AV $719,506,500 i � Parks ' � Residential (square feet) 4,613,207 k , � Commercial (square feet) p � �� ,� SCh0015 � � Church, govemment and school � � _ � � struct�res (square feet) 326,368 �^ ' ' !? Fire Stations � � _._.. __ _ _ � Roads (Lane Miles) 37 , Parks (undeveloped - acres) 8�i.93 ' � ,,: , �> C ar Rivw to lake Sa irnamish Trail Site _.�... � i ► � + � ; , � ! _. , _ Maplewood P�rit , � � �� t > ; , � 1 Mapiewood � Heights Parh Maplewood Golf Course ► i � r� . � � � ` '..11 ,•�'_. L.. li1 "+L� i1 i. ... •� ' � + ' {.�M � 'jY 1 � � T ' ��I ' � � � � � �..._...,.. .. �� i� I F i� !� ,� �1 �,�� I t - ; . �.___ . , �_____.. ____._ __ - - . -� � I �il, �� ,� �� I, �� -�I =�� • � ' � � �� / `�1 .t�� _." i 1 �111 ' � �� ' • � : e�:� ■ R 111/� _ ��C�� ' - I�t�,l�� —' �` �� c�,�. ,�'S.l. �"; , .,, � ��,r�. •� �" . � '�3�'I��r�� N�Aii� ' �... .._.: : .. ., , . _ i..� � 1. "'='j�y w: .,r�.i�.n�L �� ; : �,� �/IIE., �� G � � � N� ■■ � ; � �',- � �i.�` �� .. r� �j� !�u � � �� Gi�10'1A$�Y� � L7Y3/:i�r•.� c•'= •' '; � , � � �i=�•��: �� - ► � � �` �� ♦� ��/:1� � ��i ° ' �� _��_� � �' �� lj�i'�V �� -p��,-��.. � , ��i�� ,�� ; 'i��,;Nj:,�y � ' � ��u��N�� Tin�� p►', O��`,�N � �: -�� •. �1� �� , N�,,,.., �. N�� I ■ �- � ��,��,�»� �� .. : .� �kl��l�� ' �� n n , `�:`..:+. . '•� ti��ii �a��u�. �. .�� /�p .. , -- �� !�'i�''�i�� OI Ilf �� , � � �w� � � ��I� � ��, ' .�=.+��yi'��`�9 ��lN��s��=i�1� „�� ' �• :�.:� � I � �.1 �� !p ! I �Ni;�': �ii�� " !' � �=��:� �; '�' �� ,�, �� r� ��G�i �� y�. � � �►�� .N � r��e��.I��a ';�� h�,7�O�11�C� ��W;1�'�.��(' �� ".�� . ��iiu��i �iin r� � � ► ' � a�� . � �� l a u '� $�� :'��'=i�s��il l�� i� � �� i�i■�� , '► �di i ��1 III • • ', � ` � .i . ��I - �,�1 , '�1� � ,� •�� s .�r � �♦ c� n�M��-- '! �I . �� '. •� 'r, n• "� � �� 1?.1►\ul�� Y �!� �J� ' IM ��..� •. •:, �, � �11111I��I�j��.�yl I�j e � � �=�. � ►t ' �I n► � � �„�� -� - � '� ,,�� ''� � ' `�a� :,. �I :� � � � �� . :��_ _ ..,:��. � _ . _ . . • . ' . :::::.:..::::.:�>;:::>::::::::::::::;:;:<:;::::::::: �>: .. . :. .. .:.:, r i ' - -- . ,____; � „ � . : . .. . . �� . - - � �- ., . . - �. . . � �• . - �- . � • � .- � • � �• � . City of Renton Annexation Analysis: Proposed Preserve Our Plateau Annexation PRESERVE OUR PLATEAU ANNEXATION ANALYSIS Operating Costs Total Police Services ' $541,000 Fire Services 2 $0 Planning, Building and Public Works $682,000 Community Services $436,000 Administrative, Judicial & Legal Services $139,000 Finance and Information Services $95,000 Human Resources & Risk Management $20,000 Economic Development $87,000 Legislative $4,000 Staff-�elated Facility Costs $109,000 TOTAL COST $2,113,000 Operating Revenues Property Tax $1,390,000 Gambling Tax $0 Utility Tax $405,000 State Shared Revenues $158,000 Sales Tax $101,000 Sales Tax-Criminal Justice $93,000 Fines & Forfeits $54,000 Recreation Fees $35,000 Permit Fees $130,000 Cable Franchise Fees $40,000 Business License Fees 3 $2,000 TOTAL REVENUE $2,408,000 Loss of revenue from FD 25 4 (5558,000) NET REVENUES (5263,000J ' The expenditures for Police Services assume no impact on administrative expenses and Auxiliary Services Qail costs). 2 The Fire Services expenditures for Renton will not change as the City is already providing fire services to East Highlands area under a contract with Fire District 25. Certain services, such as Fire Investigation,Fire Inspection, Plans Review and Public Information are currently provided by King County and will become responsibility of City of Renton if the area were annexed.However, considering very few commercial properties in East Highlands,provision of these services would have a minimal impact on Renton's Fire expenditures and may be absorbed within the current budget and level of staffing. 3 This amount is 20%of estimated tota/amount collected for business license fees,as 80%is dedicated to road maintenance(capital projects). 4 The City of Renton will lose the contract payment from Fire District 25, calculated as$1.25 per thousand of assessed valuation. � B E R K & A S S OC I AT f � 2/13/2006 . � City of Renton Annexation Analysis: Proposed Preserve Our Plateau Annexation PRESERVE OUR PLATEAU ANNEXATION AREA AT A GLANCE: Land area (acres) 1,473 2005 Estimated Population 4,672 2005 Taxable AV $446,473,227 Residential (square feet) 2,938,837 Commercial (square feet) 0 Church, government and school structures (square feet) 326,368 Roads (centerline miles) 30 Parks (undeveloped-acres) 85.93 � B F R K & A S S OC I AT E � 2/13/2006 • � J � City of Renton Annexation Ar,alysis:Proposed Preseve Ocr Plateau Annexation F a„n. � �,€� '�� Le islative �' Le islative Indirect 220100 8 8 0 104000 116,100 33�k 3,805 0 Administrative,)udicial&Le al Ma or's Office Indirect 848,900 7 2 5 310,000 538,900 33�Po 77,664 0 Ci Clerk Indirect 465,500 5 5 465,500 33�/0 15,258 0 Ci Attorne Indirect 1,101,300 0 0 1,098,000 1,101,300 33�/0 36,097 0 Hearin Examiner DireR 141,600 LS L5 141,600 seePolice 45% 6,331 0.1 CourtServices Direct 1,425,800 14.7 14.7 1,425,800 seePolice 4.5�/0 63,752 OJ Economic Develo ment Economic Development Direct 1,294,200 133 1 123 113,000 I0,000 1,171,200 AV 6,344,519,649 446,473,227 7.0% 82,419 0.9 Nei hborhood Pro rams DireR 50,000 1 1 50,000 Po ulation 55,360 4,672 8.4% 4,220 0.1 Finance&Information Svs finance tndirec[ 1,773,700 20.5 5 I5.5 296,000 113,000 1,364,700 33% 44,731 1 InformationServices Indirect 1670700 14.8 1 13.8 113000 10000 1547700 33Mo 50729 0 Human Resources&Risk M mt Administrative 8 Civil Svs Indirect 620,800 4.9 4.9 620,800 339b 20,348 0 Posk.'vizna ement IndireR 1 1 139 600 3 3 123 400 1 1 016 200 EXCLUDED 0 0 Police Administration De tlndirect 1,601,100 4 1 3 144,000 25,000 437,100 995,000 0.0% 0 0.0 Patrol O rations Direct 5,288,500 47 47 5,288,500 Police model 45�Po 236,465 2.1 Patrol Services Direct 2,411,300 20.8 20.8 2,411,300 Police model 45% 107,817 0.9 Investi ations Direct 2,378,700 21 21 2,378,700 Police model 45% 106,359 0.9 Admin Services De t IndireR 1,233,300 10 10 1,233,300 Police model 4.5�/0 55,145 0.4 Staff Services De t Indired 786,700 12.4 12.4 786,700 Police model 4.5% 35,176 0.6 Auxilia Services De t Indirect 2,257,200 16 16 2,257,200 0.0% 0 0.0 Fire Administration De t IndireR 873,400 7 1 6 144,000 729,400 Emer en Res nse DireR 10,812,800 99 99 10,812,800 Fire Prevention DireR 919,000 10 10 919,000 Trainin De t IndirecY 423,300 3 3 423,300 Disaster Mana ement De t Indirec[ 14 300 0 0 14 300 Communi Services Administration De t Indirec[ 915,100 92 92 915,100 30,042 03 Facilities Direct 2,885,700 27.3 1 14.3 113,000 2,772,700 SF of ci -owned buildin 0 0.0 Parks Direc[ 3,360,800 353 1 343 113,000 3,247,800 Active arkacres 259 0 0.0% 274,149 2.9 Passive ark acres 759 86 8A% Recreation Services Direct 1,898,900 29.9 1.5 28.4 113,000 158,300 601,600 1,026,000 Po ulaUon 55,360 4,672 8.4�/0 86,587 2.4 Communi Center Direct 1,112,100 19.4 19.4 1,112,100 EXCLUDED 0 0 Senior Activiry Center DireR 564,400 6.6 6.6 564,400 EXCLUDED 0 0 Human Services Direct 541,400 2.1 2.1 541,400 Po ulation 55,360 4,672 8.4% 45,690 0.2 GDBG DireR 314,500 3.1 3.1 314,500 EXCLUDED 0 0 Libra Direc[ 1,494,700 22.5 1 21.5 113,000 1,000 1,380,700 EXCLUDED Gol(Course Direc[ 2321200 20.4 20.4 126,100 100,000 466,400 1,628,700 EXCLUDED 0 0 � Ii t R K K l�ti U C I�A 1 I � 2/13/2006 � . � City of Renton Anncxation Analys��s:Proposed Preserve Our Plateau Annexation ..,. -.. . . . :-. .. . .�,..., _, , ._ ,..�,.. . ,.:' ,. ..._:�. . . -� . . , , ,.:- ..,, . � .,,. Plannin Buildin Public Works , - - -- I Administration De tlndirec[ 363,700 3.9 3.9 363,700� � � 11,364 0.1 Develo ment Services Direct 3,200,800 382 1 372 113,000 3,087,800 AV 6,344,519,649 446,473,227 7.OMo 217,293 2.6 Maintenance5ervices Direct 19,286,900 63 1 62 739,400 113,000 977,800 17,456,700 seebe%w Adminisnation Dept Indire[[ 8 1 7 16,000 0 0.2 Streets/Brid es/Sidewalks Direc[ 2,896,000 14 14 16,000 2,880,000 Lane miles 460 30 6.5 Po 188,014 0.9 Eqwpmen� Direct 3,776,900 8 8 16,000 3,160,900 EXCLUDED 0 0 Wa�er Direet 3,768,100 21 21 16,000 3,152,100 ExCWDED 0 0 Was•ewztei Direet 9,362,100 5 S 16,000 9,346,100 E%CLI.DED 0 0 Surface Water Direct 801,600 6 6 16,000 785,600 Land area-acres 11,040 1,473 133Mo 104,785 0.8 Solid Waste Litter DireR 76,900 1 1 16,000 60,900 Population 55,360 4,672 8.49b 5,140 0.1 Trans ortation 5 stems Direct 4,525,200 29.5 1 28.5 48,400 113,000 885,000 3,478,800 see be%w Administra:ion Deptlndirect 272,600 3 1 2 173,000 759,600 14,726 Q2 Transportation Plannin Direct 541,900 55 5.5 541,900 Land area-acres 11,040 1,473 133Wo 72,279 OJ TrafficOperations Direct 467,900 4.5 4.5 467,900 Lanemiles 460 30 6.5°/0 30,754 03 Traffic Maintenance Direct 1,857,800 11.5 11.5 1,261,197 596,603 Lane miles+trafflc li hu 8luminaires 460 30 6.Swo 84,447 0.8 Transportation Desi n 8 Construdion Direc[ 506,000 5 5 506,000 Land area-aaes 11,040 7,473 13.396 67 491 0.7 Utili S stems Indirect 22,992,600 26J 1 10J 5,604,800 1 13,000 3,842,000 12,896,600 536,200 see below Technical Services Direa 477,502 4 4 477,502 Land area-aaes 11,040 1,473 133 io 63,690 0.5 Technical Services-Enter rise Fund 56,698 0 56,698 ah��c s�ry��es Other Ci Seroices Indirect 4,911,200 0 0 4,911,200 Limited Tax Gen Obli ation Bonds Indirec[ 2,556,500 0 0 2,556 500 1 15,479,800 52,182,166 22 Cost exduding SWM,Solid Waste,and Transp.Design $2,004,750 20 Highlighted in blue-capitnl funcAon Add $5,000 per FTE for office costs= 8108,984 Highligted in green-indirect costs annual Total cost exduding SWM and Solid Waste $2,113,734 20 � (i i I-:n. .� V�� i r � � . 2/13/2006 Annexation Review Form [X J 10% Notice of Intent [ ] 60% Anne �tion Pe�i�ion - � � - � TO : Finance Surface Wat�r Utility �� "�� Fire Water Utility � 2 � ��5 Parks Waste�rater Util� Police Transp�rtatiQn. Public Works Maintenance Curren� Planning � L_.____,.--- -.. . FROM : Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning (contact Don Erickson, x6581) SUBJECT . Preserve Our Plateau Annexation Background/Location: Proponents for the annexation of much of the East Renton Plateau PAA have now submitted a 10% Notice of Intent petition to the City Council requesting that it authorize anannexation election for the 1,474 acre area. Basically,�the annexation site is everything east of 156�'Avenue SE and south of SE 128th Street that is within our PAA as well as the Maplewood Elementary School site, the King County parklands south of SE 136`�' Street, and some additional properties north and south of the recent Maplewood East Annexation that recently came into the City. Areas not included include Maplewood �Heigh`ts Addition, Lamans Place Subdiv�sion, Briar Hill and Briar Ridge Subdivisions, Ridge Point Estates Subdivision (see attached map). . . Date Circulated: November�23' 2005 Comments Due: December 1, 2005 General Information Area : ± 1,476 acres Street length : To be determined Assessed Value : $17,875,000 (current); $25,750,000 (full develop) Estimated Population : ±6,500 (estimated) Current Uses Residential : ±2,300 single-family detached dwellings Commercial : Industrial : , Public : � Comp Plan Designation : 100% F2es. Low Density Future Uses: : Single-family detached housing Future Po ulation � + 9,100 estimate based on + 960 new units Reviewing Department/Division: • �s �..t; 1, �e f�'�//��1 1. Does this expanded annexation area r.epresent any unique or significant additional problems for your department/division? �',� �a�a,es ,n �s e� ;��r �� 74 �j �Sc.fda� � (Over) 2. Are you aware of any problems or deficiencies in existing infrastructure or service provision to the enlarged area? �� 3. Does this proposed expanded annexation represent a logical extension of services provided by your department/division? � �� 4. What additional facilities or staff would be required to serve this enlarged area? Can you identify any other costs the City would incur as a result of this annexation? � f ,�J��it� �J 6 �tdj��:;Ka l S��CCc., �=o r� �n��c. ��c ,. `''`h(.�SG / �/� �7. � � � � �� GCitC nt�O 61 C.t`i"' 4'�t�S . �r;� .1,f��5 , � 4`t..►i+� ak u ,� � 5. Would the City assume ownership or responsibility for facilities currently owned or managed by another jurisdiction? Would new agreements or franchises be required as a result of this annexation? t f /� � - Q,,��J�,;�; �t��c , 1��is / �r r/��C .�1 .t , ��. i � �.� ;� `//,�t�.1�/� �iL�it?G4 Kl% 1 I�.�e V-ii S��'J�� - 11 � 6. Would alternate boundaries create a more logical annexation for provision of City services? (If yes, please indicate on the attached m�p.) iu� General recommendation and comments: � �� ' �1 Z .� %��a�� v�.': �� C c��5i�cr=� �p�.� � � 5/,r�r � �l c Gf� � �'J ��2 w� a y� � . r �,.. Signature: � Date: 2 �l�� cnapte�v��.Unincorporated King County 12 7 � �� ; . East Renton � � � � , Lr� � � _ s - �� Pot nti i Ann xat�on Area � � � � � � � �`� e a e , � _ � : - � � v � w� ° ; � � 3 � � i r�� Located east of the City of Renton, north of the Cedar _ , � � ; River. The PAA encompasses most of the remaining = �-' _ � � i Y� I SE J 1 ��.n �S Urban Growth Area on the plateau east of Renton out to #-- - -,", , � I 184ih Avenue SE. Recently,this area has developed ;" '�' � � ,,,,,„ ; primarily through annexation of small parcels into the City . " �; �`� ' A C; �; R _ _ � f. of Renton in order to receive City of Renton sewer and � , � �-' � ��--�-`�=-��- , � �_ ± water service. � =rt��=`:� -i" _ . � ,;--, SE i# ��\I -� E I I1 • F \ l' +�II��~... ' /��' � �N- � �..r..�..,.�.a.s.d«-r.....�� ....w.w..,.�.._v1.emw�.r-r� � �° � QUICK FACTS . � � Land Area:2,126.25 Acres or 3.32 Square Miles ;� . "� King County Council District: l2(David Irons) School District:403 Renton/411 Issaquah , - Water District:90 � - _ Sewer District: .� Fire District: 25 Annexing City: Renton Annexation Status: = �.3�:P},�v',a- TAII INFA �� :F��R� EMPLOYMENT IMCOME 2004 Assessed Yaluatlon: ;648.3 milliort �rtf�� f Business Units: 100 Median Household Income:$65,300 Uninc.Area Levy($1.745 per 1,000): $1,130,930 =ry�j��'� Number of Households: 2,600 Total Jobs: 650 2003 Re�al Estate Sales: 551.5 millbn :�� i cturing: 30 Household by Income Category: Local Option REET Revenue(0.5%): $257,300 " IeNtilities: 20 0—80% 565 (22%) 2002 Taxable Retaif Sales: �#7.8 milUon ;� 50 80—140% 1,050 (40%) Local Option Sales Tax Revenue(1.0%): $177,580 5ervices: 100 140%+ 985 (38%) enUEducation: 250 SifUCtI0f1: 200 Source:2000 US Census D��06�'� � "�+VA Employment Secwrity Dep't 2001 2000 Census Population: �,a�o �_��=.`:=� DEYELOPMENT 2004 Population:7,500 A�'� Pop.Per Sq.Mile: 2,260 NOUSING 2003 New Residential Permits:46 Median Age: 38.2 Total Housing Units: 2,650 Single Family: 46 Age Structure: Single Family: 2,430 (92%) Multifamily: 0/0 17 and under 1.960 (26.7%) Multifamily: 50 ( 2%) 2pp3 Formal Plats/Lots: 18—64 4,830 (65.5%) Mobile Homes: 170 ( 6%) Applications: 15/2 65 and over 580 ( 7.8%) Recordings: 1 /14 Race Categories: Percent Homeowners: 90% Non-hispanic White 6,500 (88.2%) Average Household Size: 2.80 2002 Land Capacity: Black or African Am.: 110 (1.5°/a) Median House Value: $199,400 Residential In Acres: 248.35 Asian and Pacific Is: 240 (3.2%) Median 2 Bedroom Rental: $906 In Units: 1,091 Native Am.and other: 70 (1.0%) Commercial In Acres: n a Hispanic or Latino: 250 (3.4%) In Jobs: Two or more race: 200 (2.7%) S°"r�:2�o us census 2004 King County Annual Growth Report " TIMELINE FOR ANNEXATION USING CITY INITIATED ELECTION PROCESS BY QUALIFIED VOTERS p�ort�sEn ac�aN Tuvr��amrE 1. The City Council adopts a resolution calling for an election to be held Starting Date to submit to the voters of the proposed annexation area. A petition can submitted to the Council by persons representing 10% of the registered voters in the area to start the process or the Council can act independently. 2. Copy of resolution filed with the County Council and the Boundary Day 9 Review Board, (go to 4.below),or (9-days) 3. The Boundary Review Board receives and fixes a date for a public Day 24 hearing not less than 15 days or more than 30 days after receipt of the (16 days) petition. 4. The Boundary Review Board notifies City Clerk of proposed hearing Day 30 date for hearing to be held in Renton (4 days) 5. The City shall publish at least once a week for two weeks in a Day 35 newspaper of general circulation the date and place of the proposed (5 days) public hearing which is required to be held in the City at a time and place designated by the Board. 6. Boundary Review Board public hearing held. Day 49 (14 days) 7. Within 30 days of public hearing, the Boundary Review Board must Day 79 approve the proposed annexation, modify the proposed annexation by (30 days) adjusting the boundaries, or disapprove the proposed annexation. It shall file its decision with County and City Councils. 8. Boundary Review Board transmits decision to City Clerk and County Day 84 Clerk (4 days) 9. If the BRB decision is favorable, the Council, at its next regular Day 91 meeting(or special meeting to be held within 30 days), shall indicate to (7 days) the County Auditor its preference for a special election date. 10. The County Auditor shall confirm the date for the special election. Day 98 (7 days) 1 l. 'The City Clerk posts the notice far the special election at least two (2) Day 128 weeks prior to the date of the election within the proposed annexation (30 days) area as well as publishes it at least once a week for two (2) weeks prior to the election in a newspaper of general circulation in the annexation area. 12. Day of the election for residents of the proposed annexation area. The Day 129 special election shall be held within 60-days or February 4, March 11, (1 days) Apri122, or November 5, 2003. . 10/04/OS PROPOSED ACTI4N TIlVTE FRAME 13. On the following Monday, County canvassing board must submit a Day 135 statement on their findings to the County Council. (6 days) 12. 'The County Council shall enter a finding in its minutes and transmit a Day 156 certified copy to the City Clerk along with a certified abstract of the (21 days) vote. 13. If the election was successful the City Council shall establish a hearing Day 163 date for the adoption of new zoning for the annexation area and (7 days) acceptance of the annexation by ordinance. 14. City staff prepare addresses for annexation area. Day 173 (10 days) 15. The City Clerk shall provide public notice by advertising in a Day 184 newspaper with circulation in the area to be annexed for at least two (21 days) weeks prior to the public hearing 16. The Council shall hold a hearing to adopt an ordinance providing for Day 185 the annexation, the annexation and adoption of new zoning, or the (1 day) annexation, the adoption of new zoning, and the assumption of a portion of indebtedness, if any,approved by the voters. 17. The annexation area and any zoning shall become a part of the City on Day 200 the date specified in the ordinance(s). (15 days) 18. City Clerk notifies all service providers in area, including US Post Day 215 Office,that area is part of City. (15 days) 19. The City conducts a special census for the annexation area and reports Day 221 its results to the Washington Office of Management and Budget. (21 days) WASHINGTON STATE BO ARY REVIEW BOARD DATE �UhE 14 ��6 «i� 22 ITY OF RENTON - PRESERVE OUR P�ATEAU ANNEXATION FOR KIN�UNT'I' � � �` FILE NO. � PUBLIC I-�EARING PLEASE DO NOT SIGN THIS REGISTER, LTNLESS YOU WISH TO IF CLAIMING 10 MINUTE TIME POSTITON ALLOCATION AS DESIGNATED TESTIFY BEFORE THE BOLJNDARY REVIEW BOARD. �ruESErrTATivE oF�.iv oRc�zEn GROUP,GIVE Tf�NAME OF YOUR PRO CON FOR STAFF USE NAME(Please PRINT) ADDRESS(Legibly) ORGANIZATION AND YOUR OFFICIAL TITLE WITHII�I Tf�ORGANIZATION. � S � . /�� .�/. e f�o �tl �e �. c� e-L, QC�os ( � - ! S S Q O_ T (,� �S��zo- � .3 � �e S� ti h a � Q h �'1�i 7`6� . 9 �4S ! o i� �.� �E ��/1�� G'v/G So.y , 6S 13 — � (�� N Nt—��-;�o,v ��a,t ctr'� �/ � � �ti �� y !� 6� I .2�-/�� S'F. �' 6�.��e 6�«, l � -�� w�- p g-os ��, �- ,�� S �. ��;a�J o�,v,,e-t I �h t,�1,�- ss�s '< �r G� - G v� •� � 7'-��f� ci��SG"/L- �� w oS� � � � ( 0 17 r �� s - � ��,� ��r G� �`C�"s ��i1- ��T��J vJ �S �1 —�f I l 3 � G— i77�- vst S�-. ��I' � � / + S�t� '� .2n o'h a S � 11�O �r ----' /Sro o� ..s�r' /39� P/ f-o u r c�•.�t�<S v�.,.�.��p�Q t 'C�6�r ��zP•'•�iT n f� ti cv�- 9� ��' f)-n r_A co�,�c � WASHINGTON STATE BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD DATE JU�E 14, 2006 � 2231 -CITY OF RENTON - PRESERVE OUR P�ATEAU ANNEXATION FOR KING COiJNT'Y FILE NO. PUBLIC HEARING PLEASE DO NOT SIGN THIS REGISTER, LJNLESS YOU WISH TO IF CLAIMING 10 MINUTE TIME Posrriorr TESTIFY BEFORE THE BOLTNDARY REVIEW BOARD. ALLOCATION AS DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE OF AN ORGANIZED GROUP,GNE TI-�NAME OF YOUR PRO CON FOR STAFF USE NAME(Please PRINT) ADDRESS(Legibly) ORGANI7.,ATION AND YOUR OFFICIAL TITLE WITi-IIN TI-IE ORGANIZAT'ION. � �� C��,5�- �� i �s �^ s � ►�,�s P, � r �o-, � � S/�z-/ f!r• _/_ -� � ��os X o " � �D � cv�� g o - � / z z � 3 �E � �.a✓��.rc,�F�� iJ?a�J _ �'f'sa�'. `� ' � 2 ��"/1//1// � C`` ' o s�' , -- � . ---�� / - w �(�, !'�a¢e� �C�eed ;� C��.n�i- �•�_�y�t't tF� ! � � � � � ` yyy � [1CQi111t� Lf1l.0� � � � �'�.E N0. 2231 - CITY OF RENTON - PERSERVE OUR PLAT� ANNEXATION (POPA) � . LIST OF HEARING EXHIBITS Exhibit No. Item Description - A Large Board Map of Annexation Area B Large Aerial Board Map of Annexation Area C Large Board Map of the Annexation Area D Slide Presentation by the City of Renton E Transparcency of the Annexation Area F CARE - Citizens Alliance for Kesponsible Evendell G Comments s bmitted b resident of the annexation area I u y H Letter submitted by Claudia Donnelly, dated June 13, 2006 I Citizens/Petitions/Signatures and Address not willing to annex to the City of Renton J Letter from Loretta Meyers, dated June 14, 2006 K Letter from Christa Lemberg, dated June 9, 2006 "_�..��..7 .......... f FILE N0. 2231 - CITY OF RENTON - PERSERVE OUR PLATEAU ANNEXATION (POPA) LIST OF HEARING EXHIBITS Exhibit No. Item Description - L Letter from Linda Williams, dated June 14, 2006 M Letter from David Delaney, dated June 9, 2006 ' N Letter from Bill/Susan Heffner, dated June 9, 2006 0 Letter from Daniel Potoshick, dated June 9, 2006 � P Letter from Ameliese/elden Lamb, dated June 9, 2006 Q Letter from Paula/Michael Corbett, dated June 9, 2006 R Residents of Maplewood Heights-Bria Hills Area with signaCures and maps � � � � y � � �, �� """� ,� , �� , 5 . � x � � �r : �..^'�`� �P L .3'� '�� : '�.i'�'� ,�'�' �-w- �� k � �� ;=y £ y� ��: r.—"T"K=z x,% C: ��' ha� +� ;� 1t �r t� � �� y� , � � �� 4 s I'resen7� C�u�- I'lateau ' �,nne�ation � �� Boundary Revie�r Board Public IIearing Jirnc 14,Z00(, � � Back�ratmd � �� In No��ember 2005,C'ity received 10°io Notice of Intent petition calliny for an election � � On January 1 I,2006 petition�vas certified by County Gicctions as having sinnanu�es represcoting� � at least l0%of registered��oters in tl�e annexation area�aho voted in last general election ` On January 31,2006 Renton requested the Board tohold�puUlic hearing in order to recei��e public input oii tlle proposed anne�ation � � � �� • • '�� 1 , a1 : � 1 B�t,l:;.�rotttlt{, coriti�tued On FeUruary 13,2006 Renton Council adopted resolution callinQ for a�i election on the question of amiexation btit decided against putti�i�issue of future zoning on ballot, przfeiring to ho(d public hearings that residents can attend ° Rentan's Council also decided not to ask�.oters to assume City's voted indebtedness since the remaining�mouiit is so little a� - r-.��;c ��,t��, � Pi�t�a��^�:a ; � ' i Si�e: 2,091 acres �- ' � ; �stintatcd Pon:7,287 �� Roads: 37 miles � �� "• P�r_I<_s: 8�.93 acres . � ,. �� County Zoning Map ..��■ I'a.apased �lnnexatian �r�� • _ . Existi�7b C�i�ditions � PAA-��'ithin Renion's Pf1A �� Location—Generaily arca east of 1�6°i Aee SE and south of SE 128°i St�i�ithin Renton's Gast Plateau PAA,and a fe��°properties�+�est of I�G°i Ave SE Size-+ 1,475 acres �� Existin�Use-± 1,630 single-family d��ellings � Boundanes—2!3's of site is bordered bv the Urban Gro��th Boundary � �� 5 S��t: t�y�� - � �� u`� y ? J �,t�, : SE�'�b Slit';t!'�,� .i1�. t�+ ��'� � 3 k�:.. k... 'i � �3 M!_tv'.I.��ll w.;.��^i+,$'!' �I�1 tn(C i��1 � x ^ S I� : k� 6 : }ibc11 Ji�h � � 5 I k�J�" � ��i: tr` i a'� �� a to k K�7'�II 51 � � 4 .xr. 4} ,� . U� � �''� '� Fi»�t�l��rAc ;e,� M � 3 /� �,�' t � v ,. e �:+y; 'aa��Rlr�P��}'i�d�'- �., . : 'kc ia P l� �� "y p t Alatrl ;l� iC i �-L luht � ��.�. Y SJrl�p��!;� '� / <�r t � �. �' I �; S � � �f 4 ,µ ��F 1 W YRil ��e�� a .� ..� �1�i 1 ?�+a;. � e �"� � `L'�' �'^.��"Itu:�'s^w '�, .�` .�vr�� _�m . . � . � <,�..r� --. ,a��,,. � �t � .,,, �`'�;:;: � � � � -- - ��,� ,T---__. .. �. � .�—�—' "R.:r� � -�, �.;�-:�--;; �,° ;; � . : 'r `L. Y tl .,f'�-.r �'�e;*.:�i t-s � . a . '��;'"�^�,.!';�..'ib-•��;��.•3 � ' c:�j � "�'�.. .i.iF�,q.rY ffi�'da,,�..,,.,y�.,�.� �w� , � \ >�� ' x � � ' , E,��(rp4,¢: .�:y.,: ti�"'^:,T'``-^ ,.�. . -� �q � {�#:`;�- �r�=� .:x. � ! � , a«-.�'.:,a'. � � ��r�,:��.-'«l"�". `��,R:-'�;i�cce.�r:..,;''�as' � �.: ,yp , , �-"--.,--,�.�e:•f�� a3v"' .��';i�' �"> �.'-�}�r,-� ;k r._ _..�.. �. �, s?�5$'n,-.(�.,%�,x,.'.9-e' <c •��'� �,`v ��' " '�"'� 'A;.jj �-_ " iw�' �,�E��Y..��.�� ' �,�?'''��`+��'��^• .,r.5 # „�:" me��.,'..�' /' a3{.t,� "1 ,� r '. ...:..._ `�'L�+.� �rn:: �`� � � ' dF V§ .s':'„ �,'a'-C.,'��".�;:.�.r�y� ..• �^>' .*ii'a':��Y b;: �•';'�„-. .;�,r;.... ;� ,�'r .�:.�,. s �. _{,�.. ,�r , .s s�x °��'�;sxs:s��'.'r`.::i$:`,�:`�-�-, $�_ ,� �."'�;"ft�;� , . . > im..: t','-'•<:� '�;'.2��'�~�� k:{y�N,i';tY;:,.i'. ..�.�a :s"' �, .�-'�i.'' ai:?'sc-:i;�-. ,}:;;c.y .��z4 g}a.'x'r':�y . �"q,^', #+�K $' .•€y� s:AD ��:;t��.`�.'`.�' �,'�.�... .. ^?,/��"'G� ;�i.`�aY.�s '• �.ry,� �..*,,�,'+�ug�'„!i { , . �6'+�'�„, _f, �,tL.�� .=�['�s...,i�;-C.,'�.,,f,%�y�,..'�.s„^'��; `T��`-.,..�n,.,� �::�" �r�;�:-�:r�,w:y�'"j�.:;`__.,� ..:..;�,Yi. 1. . �r-Ctr: .;y` �*''`:.---C r ��+ ` _ ��\s .. `�� pyy �,✓�-I . . - �a..i"'!` . +i�._::" � . Proposed Preserve Our Plateau AnnexaGon __�„,��,r � "��°a,'�,".:°; ._.._. �....�, � i �� . . � .{�' 4�r'� . '.: ` ::j�� ..: �' �'=T.<: �� . , t` ��'�L r�b.��^ :S.v.. ;�i.4.. a�.�� t.4� <` ,N.,w, �F�.'` �T},'. :y' ' F��i:. �� Pj?�'�>� �Ai:: . S�..s i i I;�' _"{.{�i^ . �`a.�i a�' :': " ; -��,;��€i �,,+�! . :;y� �� s�� i�:' z;� �"� ; m,' .P ':��4� '`�! t..� 4."~` f�a�W a � j^ $ ;�:;. x :':`' � r.' r • 1,' Fr �- . i"'��,q9Y r�,t��t P�j, ,.�'�,�' ;�h� �� ¢ : ,�f. `!��- .*. ;�.� , rJ ;�r,• �aa+ r , Y.is '� i � ,�5.'��i� t, M{ r , i'r'1/'gw'A_:1��:.�:*� r-.S u,•�.u,.� ..�� .�.• . ., ,��-y:��*:�...'�"�'�:�,_'�`..'�'i-'»�'e,e�'��7'i'�i�1'i�=:^,��F�t( ...,__,... - Proposed Preserve Our Plateau Annexation � �"" _..,.._.. - „�.... � 4 _. � ill . � - . . � � � �1 �' �I �I � - - _• - BoUndary Rationalizatiari Exclusion of areas��est of ,,,., . 14-t'�'Avenue Sb and north �" of SE 1-�0°i Street ° , .._ — ._ . , � , . - � .. �.., Area cun'enth undu�_oin� ,� , ,� � . incrcmcntal amu�viun 3 �.�' .—a � Exclusion of areas��est of `�'� � � �� • _�-� 152°d Aeenue SE and south -� �'?�' ,. ' � of SE 138°i Street �� '�" "� � . . � � : . Residenr ofinea�ated °''� cieains[anncxation in Nu�cmbcr1996��ith �:. more dian 31°0 oppoced � '�A � .� IGia�� Cowlty C'ozn��a-elle»si�re Pla�i Land Us� L?�si�n�tion �� iii� �� '�- � ■ �,��}t� Si� :4 e ' �Z�IA �25�"��f� ..: � �� d ��.�{ r��tl��''�'SJ'ii44�IV,�i�'��y . �-��-1'�t � � �6 :N�. ��Fr v � � ��' t�S �' �.+f�`„'.��, �6 ��'';��'f��6j��,��' �.S`' �e ��I'��. . . 1 ,'�"v� up�p��p .. �� i 9 . � ./x��i�� S c"' '' . �' � �5 �Mp.y �� l'r.t!N''$�g� '�€.,�t'x� . .��e.11a:�lt_.....,..ry �£.��x� +�'..,...��n"i��aa�. I<i m:Coimty designates most ot�[n;t Renton Platcnu Url�an t�csidcnd,il.mcdiwn.d-12 du/ac IZe��ton Coznpz-el�ensiti�e�Pl��L�aricl �� Use Desi�nati�ri-- 1995-?Q04 ��'�� I� "-� , t r � � u :-�f�. v , �G � �°�� ! � �.. �� '��.��,, -��, .,. ; ' .+��u �� 1i�l. � �� •,. 1� � ��. �: �� r � �� ;� ;- ��.�#��, � , ,� '��° �� ..,�,. �,�:� - In 1995µRcnton Council dcsi��natcd moch ol'E.jst Rcnton Ylateau}tesidential Single Fainil}(RS),aila�s max.A du'ac Renton Comprel��nsi��e Plan Lanci Use Desi��lation - 2G0� In 3003 Planning staff inet�+ith residents of the East Renton Plateau to discuss their l ision for this arca This led to shared�ision that�rould see future decelopment more ii�character��ith existing de��elopment patterns includin�: larger single-familv lots,deeper front yards,increased side yard set backs, retention of portions of existin�trzzd areas,and articulated dwelling fa�ades � ln No�•ember 2004 Renton amended its Comp Plan Land Use Map changing the land use designatio�i for this area from RS(m�s.8 du/net ac),t�RLD(max.4 du.%net ac) Renic�n Coi1��rehe�lsiv� Plan Land l7se Designation - 20tJ4 � �.r- ��. : w t�'�� .,; E � ��. �� - '� w-, �..� � � _ , . � ,_. � � ��.� � � , � . � rk ��d��+�r �. � �. L � �� Y �.��t�9! .�'� �.�-;•Mr��t`_.� -..�.-.. In Novembcr 2004 Cowicil rede;ienated most of Cin,t Renton Platcou Rcsidcntinl Ixiw Dcn;ity(ItI.D),maximum 4 cl�dac. u � '_ ��w r�� €,��' r „ � . <� �' „�, 1 "�t :: � x�� . �." � R �� .-�m �, "',�� € y .� '^ � �,=t.+� a; � a� t s `��'..�„�� .�:, a 4 ��.�� + _ ,�;�'` � r . 8 '# i ro �4.F �� - � �,� ...� P��s-,_�r sm�i1 �� E...�v._ ,. . .. .w........ ��"�. ~'� � '�F� �� ` �.:; C � � �' " f x Kn� ,,,, Character residents ,� ,�;� , ��ant retained�+ith r��',' t ; ��' � future develo}�ment � � � ., re� = < � � � `�' � ` Fv �..� L�r �'� . x v., t�� y �v�r� .: � �» � Y "^i ,M,� � 3 .+e'k A j��"�'T.....� �$'.�'�R�l� � �R�l +4�j'^s '.� Q�V' \ ��V�� . k"� � � ��3.\ S a�f� \ �F x-�� `.. i �� ..�'�4 � 4.� � � � �x � �� i . � ��F � :.a�.��3"��t��s,��r$ 7� �� ,�o��''", �� N��, s� r� �'� �� s,�� .�� q��c s �b�� q �s a c �. 4 ��`{� �"; �q.�+ � �� '`y��3�� ,t g � s� Z+- :- ('} Ff � 7 � a p�� ' � Sa:,� t�� ➢,'`{.E�6��'�..��`,I C 'i.3�s > � `. a" . ,. !s r ��`n�'7.�f.� ti� �x 4 :, �'f . �\ t� F��. � '.. : �� ' 'f� 9:>`�� I , ° � I ``' - � � � ��4.�....�� __,�,.._..�,- _ ��....! �.... ..:. .... . ��-�. :� �'ie�c Inoking nonlmast 6om imersectiun nt\1aple\"nlic��Hieh��.y and � . � I�t°i A��enuc SE.si�udi of ne«'ln'i�l_c � � � Existi�lg C�onditi��ns - Public Servic�,s �� Fire--95%in f7re District 25 �� and 5`5o in Fire District 10 i5-' i ;ry - Utilities - Widiinl�VaterDistrict ,N..,,��;"?�� 90 Service Arca --. — Within Rentor�Se�ver ;ti,�� _ � Service firea �� Schools � �� - Within both Renton and � �;,��;, Issaquah School Districts � -i: .f:U�,`"� Distxicr No.to C'J` "''_'-'"� > . . `1._ :.�;> �=i , uca :e; . �: . �QR"; *:x:."; CC1I#, �-n' 3`,K^'`:'..N;":'�'.�,q r.;' �,-.;�� ;'k `pistricii i+It7.e2�,''':' , .. . T�x,: .. "�_�.�i'.n-�°.�` ",�,�._ ��aa �f'CSIt' 't:i_�,. �,s,'',, r_' , , ;d : , ''yi. � . , ':,;,,r.;:�'.':';`� , " ��. .:. .. .� :.�;:,s :._,,,j" M1". , ;. -;;�._�..,.UG$ �,�;�"`.... . , ' ,.. ; Disliict,No.40 �;-� Fire District#25 �, :�, i(KN) r� ..�Eo.nannUekpnw�u.'.+a5hir+M.Kx6.rcma'FFia�im �'�'xaarzsr�q �. ne.VWd.a.f..:.w..��- —`rt r ` �t. owe�.,�..�, �na��.n �:nc.:�,,r,s � �b�s.S� ��CveeCkemlvx ••••�pm.bx�4ic�ta�/�-m u�8uedry' L�i ��. � �'�'T� �t .!` �.�y� PP' � � 8 _ Co1n}�liance ��ith Cousityti��id� Plannir��Pc�licies F\�'-4 Allt�i�'icdictirnic�hall Rentoiihasde�eloped protect and enhance the nattu'al eomprchensi�e l�lan;,policic, '< eco,�stem,tlirou�,h comprehensi�e �nd clevclopment regulalions to`: plani pnlicics.and de�elopment protect en�ironmentally reeulalions ;ensitive areas and features. F1�'—12 Thc lirban Gro+eth Arca I'he 1.47>-acre sitc is�<ithin�hc' shall }xocidc cnou�h land t�� Ur�an Gro�rth r�rea and can accommc7date future w{�an aeeommodate an estimat�d 1.060 de�'elopment ne�+�StructurCs and 3,657 pCrsons Ll-26 The Iand>�cithin the UGA Rcnton ar�icndcd its Comp Ylan :hall bc charactenzed by urb�n oi�Novcmber?0��1 to shuw lo�v decclopmcnt �dcnsitti urUan residential at�7 dw'ac tln'oughout this arca Coil�pli�.�nc� with �'ouutyl��ide �� 'lani�in�:I'olii;ies, co��tinuec� � � I,L'-?9('itec;hall de��elop lt i:unlikeh-that Renton��ill gio�a th phasin��plan.con:istent pro�ide se�cer serrice to d�e ++�ith applicablc capital faciliti�s area enst ol't?>'^.��enue S6 in plans to m�intain�n Urban E1��ea lhe next sis ycar:. As,� sened�cidi adequate public consequence diis area is likely' facilitics to mect;is-ycar I to be znned at a lo��er densit�� intennedi�te hou;ehold and I unlil se�cerrs can be pro�idcd. emplo�ment tar��et ranges. � LL-30�1'here urban ser�ices am Lo�cer dcmity zuniug in eastcrn not procided��ithin 10 year;. third of propi�seit annexation citics shall dcrclop Policics and site would reduce need far re_�ulatiuns to phase and limit urban scr�iccs to U�is arca in tl�c de�elop;nent so that plannine and immediate futwr Hhile creating - inlia;tructurc dccision:support a u.v�sition ro die surroundin�, futurc dcvclopmcnt o hcn scnicc ivral arca on thc othcr side of Uecome a�ailable tlie UG}3 C'o�n��Iia��e 4vith BP�B C7bj�clives Preccrcatinn of nahual Thc rroposcd boundaric;of--- ncighborhoods and this anncx�rtion rct7cct cxisliny cammuniiic: neighborhaods and crnntnut�ihes Use of ph�sical U:wndaiies. O�cr GG°b of arca's boimdnrics includin�but nol limitcd to dctennincd by Urbun Grow�th � bodic;ot�vater,higli�rays, Area I3oundaty��ith another 20",u �nd land contours by Renton�.municip�l boundnry Crcation and prescn�ation of 9�°u of.irc.i scr��cd by Firc � lo:.�ical scrvice anu: Uishict 2i uhich Rentou tier�e•s ` undcrcontrnctand t00!'o��ithin � Rcn�on Sc�ccr Scr�iec lrca Pre��entionofabnorm�lly h�lajorit��ofm�ea'shoundarie;are irrceidar houndarics dctcnnincd b�-Ihc UGf3.t1'cstCrn boundarics.ur intcrim pcnding future anncxatii�ns � Con�pli�nce with B�RB (�bjective� �� Uiscouraecmcnt of ntultiplc Nol applicaUlc inco�porations of sn�all c�hes- � � � Dis'solulion of�inacti��e special Not appiic;�hie pu�posc di,tricr Ad.ju,tmcnt ofimpr�ctical Thiti annesatiun iias not boundarics proposcd lo a�ljust impraclical bowidanes � lncurpor,�tion as citics or tu�+ns Not applicaUle or anncxation to citics or to��ms of unincorporated areas urban in chai:�ctcr Protcction of a�miculturil and Not applicable. 1�hole area is rutal lands designated ti�r long desi�nated Urban i��Comity teim use Coinp Plan Fiscal Analysis f��•East Rentc�n Plateau�� `J.q91 drrev.:,-'3"Rrsidri+i.� �. O eratin�_Re��enues_" --�---_ - Operatirn_Costs':>: Yropc�ly l as S3,?6U,OOp PoliceScr�ices S'38.000 Gamblin�Tas 5 0 Firc Sct��ices 590�,000 L�tility Tax 5 63U,C�00 Pf3P\4�s 5963.000 State Shaird Re��. S ''-�i 000 Comm.Ser��s 56ll.000 S�les Ta� 5 1�7.000 Ad..Judic..f�eal 5177.000 Sls'la.�-C'�iml.lu: S 146�)0� PinanceS info S112.U0� ��r�.}��rfeits � ?4(J00 � Hum.Rccourcc, S 24A�0 Econ.Dc�clup. 5 7,00� k��rcntion Fcc� S �4.000 Le¢islati��e S 4.000 Pcnnit Fccs S 310,b00 � Statl�Pac.Costs 51�7�100 CablcTran.Pcc, �, 63A00 TOTAI.COS7' ±�3,69G,000 13us.l.ic�.Pcc; S 2.G00 2006?�et Piscal Imnact` TOTAL R[:�'. S3,831?,fi00 S 134,G00 "".S�n�rce:Rerk ct:tss'ucrnles Kill� Cc�i�i�t�� Ann�x4�tion Ir�itiative �� Li'_QO-�,liin�County's new Annexation Initiative: � callinz i�r the anncsation bv 2012 of most of thE Countv�s rctnaining unincoipor�icd urban arcas statin�ii ctin no lungcr al'lurd tu pro��idc tu�ban scn�icc;to t��esc arca, Cast Rcritgn E'latcau Offcr: S 1.75 ft1(51.15(�4 RGCT, �G00 I<CX)�+ith;4 payaUle upon successful election and'/z upon eftectuatian of annexation.Can be used for: Parks and stonm�ater propeii}transfer �� Potentiall�iringCoirotl�emplo}res — Dcrclopincnt Stand�rd� � Offer docs not increase�vith expansion,ho�ve��er reduction in arca reduccs a�nount City�tiould reccivc � East I2enton I'lateau rinilexatioi� I1n��li�;ations � In order to ensure Renton's current level of service for the�vhole East Renton Plateau PAA.City anticipates hiiing 31 addiUonal entploye�s - Initially Renton could anticipate a revenue swplus of 5134,60U in?00�increasin�ro 51.?3 million by : 2015� • Major efticieneies of brin�iri�area iri at one tin�ie � that��ould not be realized��itl�smaller piecemeal anne�ations of 20 to 30 acres each �:Sourec:Ge�ri;cC.4s,oc'inlns.fisral/in;�ar�nf.,ivr<rafions.Uc!_'Opi �nnexatioii Implicati«n�, contind�ed —Efficiencies include staffin,up noi��and becoming the sen ice procider for this area —Controlling ne�i de��eloptnent under Renton°s zonin«aud de�elopmetit regulations ratl�zr than those of the Countv Renton is mcommending that d�e proposition of ��hetl�er voters fa��or annexation or not Ue placed on the ballot for a fall or spring election k'L11Llt"� %OI7tl1� �� ln passing its resolution Rento�i's City Co�mcil decided not to place the proposition of fut�u-e zoning�vithin the 1,475 acre anneration area before the voters at this time —In 300-�Renton amended its Comp Plan, changin�.:l�nd use designation foa-most of East Renton Plateau PAA fi•om Residential Sin�le family(RS),��hich allo��ed S du/net�cre,Vto � Residential Lo�v Density(RLD),�c�hich allows � masiiuum of 4 du/net acre,and TiItUTG ZOC1tll�, C�rltiriuec� --Because area has not yet been prezoned City belie��es it is premature to put zouing issue on ballot at this time, � �� --City prefers to hoid t��o or rnore public hearings on rezoninrt tivhetj it�a�ill bc able to presentsub-area reconunendations consistent��itli the Residential Lo�� Density desi�n�tion Outstaudi��;In��bte�ne�ss � � Tl�e Renton Citv Counci(al,o decided not to place proposition of��hethcr voters��ished to assinne their proportionate sl�are of City's voted outstanding indebtedness on the ballot bccause: -- �super majo�ity�vould be required to pass it —Those��otinb must be equal or greater than 40°o oF those F�otin�in last general election —City s outstandin��indeUtedness is near retirement IllfC?�l"111�t1n11 j:'sSl1�S Ho��uill the annexation�ffect Fire District 25'? —Thc}�ro��oscd annexntion would reinorc�1?0 of thc currcnl assccscd valu�tion of Dislrict?i. (3ccausc thi.is Ic:s than 60�6,Ihc Dislricl�j ill conlinuc lo cxist but Rcnton��ill pruvide scr�ice to d�e anne�ation area. What efforts�vill be taken to create an oi�derly transition bet��een county and mm�icipal�overnment? Thc Cih and liin�County arc currcntly discussin� intcrlocal sgrcemcnls regardin�t6c transference of: Coiinty o�cned facilitie.for parklands and surf.�ce��atcr �rcalmcnt lacilitics Coiml��Scr��iccs Such a,policc.road m��inlcnai�cc.pl,mninc and developmcnt pennittin��. - - Ialfot7natic►x� I:ssues, ca�ltinued 11'ill annexation tiivin�atfect the existing se�+er moratorium? '1'hc c�isting sc��cr moratorium is scl�cdulcd to c�pirc i�i Dccembcr,ha�ing bcen extendcd fm�a��othcr six n�unths. If clection not hcid wuil 20(!7 —Options include extcnding thc moratoriuin ii�r anothcr fe��monlh;.ur — Letting it cxpire�nd co��tinuine ta issuc perinits b�sed o�i Rcnton�,Comp Plan RLD land usc dcsi�nation �1'ithout se�ser mm•aforium developir�e�it occurrin� during interim�iuuld de�elop to Cuunty standards IiYforii�atian Issi�es, con�inued � • The anCicipated le��el of service POPA residents �es�►� ��ould receive��ould increase at the same time ��if1° ,�.�T;a� the con�bined taxes and fees most pay,��ould �,��iM decline • Residents annexin<�to Renton��ould save �� between 10°�o aud 50°%o in user fees at many City��7\�� facilities �`�� • Fire service and garUaee service for most residents��ould not change,and school "^� �,,;. district boundaries do not change as a result "�^" of annexation � �:t;;: • Non-city uscrs of City utilities such as se��cr or �+ater pay 1.5 times the cost City residents pay 111f0t711111CTYl ISSI,I��, G011'�1ilUCC� • [3ecause of rcciprocity agrcements bet�vecn ' � " the Ciry and County,residents�vould have '� �'`� access to both library systems 'f �`�� ,� • Future zoni��a for most of this arca a�iil ��(�� lil;ely be R-4(4 units per net acre) � � reflecting the existing lower de��sity �,�� '�, "� character of much of the area �; �� " � I��for�n�3tioii Issues; cantinuec� If this annexation bv clection fails,��hat i5lil:elv ro l�pen to the ama in the near term? As the desi;�nated se«er ser�'ice pro�ider for th�;area the C'it��has aliead�is,ued se�aer ceriiticates tix c��er?�D tmi[s in llic area. 7 he e�i;tim_sc��cr muratoiiwn�rill be lifted and new ceniticatesi;sued based upo�i the('ity�s RLD Comp Plan � land uic dcsienation.or-�da'ncl acrc - Sub:cqucnl anne.�.�tion�lil:�ly lo bc incrcmcntal and lcss � than 50-acres in area � � � -Until mmesation uccurs futm�e development�a�ill condnue �� undcr Kin�Counh•dccclopmvnl rcgul,itions � - 6�esed upon Coauty statement,ihe exi;tin�le�ei i�f senice �cill continue to decline LOIICILiS1021 The proposed Preser��e Our Plateau Annexation is: • Generally consistent�viti�Renton�s Comp Plan annexation and lo��densitv sin�le-fan�ily policies • Generally consistent��ith rele�ant Count��+�ide Plannine Policies • Generaliv consistent��ith F3oundan Review Board Objecti�es y Coilclusiol�, continu�d Thcrefore,the City of Rcnton res}�cctfully requcsts that the Bo�mdarv Revie�v Board support Re»ton's resolution cailin�for an election,by: � � • endorsin�;the Presen e Our Plateau Annexatiai, and � � � ° supporting the�it��'s resolution c�lling fo�an election,with d�e only ite�n on tl�e ballot bein�; � the proposition of�;hether vaters suppart or do not support annexin;thc 1,47�acrc POPA arca at this timc � . ��;, . ;. _��. , �.. i � i v`ill��' � 15 � . A . R . E . - Citizens ' Alliance for a Resuonsible Evendell � ... doing what we can, with our ne�ghbors, for vur community ... HOME ANNEXATION HTSTORY CONTACT US Annexation Information Boundary Survey: On June 23rd the CARE Annexation Gommittee mailed a Boundary Survey card to every property that might be included in an proposal for annexation to the City of Renton to aske each property whether they want to be annexed. On July 7th and 9th, tae mapped the responses. On July 18, the results were posted to this site. Here are the Results: "' •., _ ��u�_t_�,_� ��lax� shows the N1ap B1ocY.s .listed in the table. � r; .. ,"a�._•�r:� �r;c, ,r:a.lys:.s foll�_=.�r `he �_able �elow. � � ��e.�r{`f1 i'1 �-�'i: ' ��J�U v' ;Map % Red of � �reen of �S Yellow $ No �Block Total Total of Total Response of Estimated Estimated Estimated �'otal � Adult ult Adult Estiutated � Population Population Population ult Population �'! � � 10. h8: 9 . 40� O.00o 84 . 93a ;------ ;--- ° � b. 2�t=,, 5.23� 0. 660 87 . 78� ; , � � � � � I 1I . 08> 1. 730 1. 39a 85. 80a i �� • - i j 9 1� . 50� 1 . 80% 1 . $0% 84 . 91% � r-------- ! � 5 11. 85� • 4 . 8$0 2. 79% 80. 49� r--- — � i !; 1!�. HS`� 3. 63� 1.210 84 . 50a � { � ? 6. 90� 4 . 27� 0. 82� 88 . 01% � �.._.__ � � ` , �4�. 4 . 48� 1 . 49Q 86. 180 . ; ,; , . { T _� �� . h 1 x 19 . �� o:o o� �3. �1� �ASHINGTON STATE BOUNDAf i ` , �' � � � REIII�IN�pA�p FOR KING COU - w��# �� i� 6. 4 9� 3. �L e 3. 0 8 0 8 6. 5 5 0 ��('j; �' I � I c�l�7 7l19/05 12:26 1 � I l� 26. 520 5. 680 0. 950 66. 850 � 1: 9. 75� 3.790 1. 350 85. 100 r�_ - � _ __. 1 � 13 9. �2� 6. 62� 0. 750 83. 310 15 9. 32� 2. 840 0. 41% 87. 440 !� ! �r7 �6. 17� 10. 91% 1 . 79% 61. 180 � �- � . lSuAunary 11.05�s 4.85� 1.18� 82.92� Color Codes: Red = I want to stay King County Green = I want to annex to Ftenton Yellow = I haven't decided yet Assumptions: -- �:`�l .sna�ysi� rrrser:!�ed here is based on hand counting of votes and parcels. - c•:��c� <:a�men�s h:��e �eer in cbunted above as parceis due t� no ability for GIS :.-�-�.s�.r.-is .�� tnis ,�;a�d '3riOthET hancl caunting problem) . - :;.,;,:� n::;_7--rc�ti'n� �urcels (schools/fires station/parks} caunted above as parcels Ia•.� t:� -�,c ak,i'i�; ior G�S� analysis of this data (another hand counting � �L�.L��If:; . � - B�s�;� o:� res,r,or:sas, we estin�ate an average of 1.75 adults per parcel. - F:r��ent:;:q�s pr��ented abave DO PJOT INCLUDE any sewer convenant related data - ..� f_ i:, ...., :e=s ,s��id survey res�c,nses only. -- i:��.:�l Est.imated Adt.�t P��pulatic�n is NOT EQUAL to the Total Registered Voter F`:>�.•ai at.ion. :inly regisC�red vaters will have a final offical voice at election. h::�-:-.�r. s.:�i.�r�,es �>f a•�cidental or unavoidable error in our methodology include 'r.:�.._ ..._ -. �;r:�b��•1� n,�t lin:it?d toj . =. F��:� ::;i�:;-�se� tl-:ut snculci �or h��:e been included !outside .c-�, _ .::� ._1�. �rf�,�r.�d are�? w�re �n�lude�. .=. ::��::� �.i-��:s�E� �l:ar_ should have been included where not included. , `�t�� E�'.�SL '�ti>:? ra�urned some �ards as undeliverable when they should ��sva �e?n delivered. , �=:�.��,:>r;��es are a se.'z-sele��ted sample instead of a more scientifically - - i�i ra��:l:�rr sa[�i�:]� ;e':. Special Notes: C��:�r.� �.;r, r_he ass��ciaceci ma� ARE I�TUT perfectly positioned on the responding �`:�_.��15. C��.;+_� :�,N_;, 1� �e��iy as possible by manual process, positioned on the block :r:.._ :;P._::+� ~_h�v �ame. Conclusions• - T��c- l��:v r�spc.�nse rate (<18'�1 eombined with the error inherent in a ._��lt-:e�.�,�te:� sample renders this data insufficient for proposing an annexation �.��:'�:i:�.Y� . - T:ii� s�:r:�ey did nor. �i��t✓idF thar data thar we had hoped. Nonetheless, the data "�rrr •.. ,� :-��;�: I;��r: �:��r:�rr:t.e�9 is �nstri.�crive. '- �� 7/19/OS 12:26 Pt � " Initial Boundary Survey Results Report-June 2005 Map Blxk%Red of Actual %Red of Tota� 76 Oreen of %f3reen of Total %Yelbw of %Yellow o(Total%No Response Response Estimated Adutt Actual Response Esdmated Adult Actual Response Estimated AduR of Total Population Population Populallon Estimated Adult 1 70.8396 10.6896 29.17% 4.4096 0.00% 0.0096 84.93% 2 51.3596 6.2896 43.24% 5.28% 5.41% 0.66% B7.78°6 3 78.05% 11.08% 72.209F 173% 9.7696 1.39% 85.80% 4 76.19% 11.5096 11.90% 1.80% 17.90% 1.80% 84.91% 5 60.71% 11.85% 25.00% 4.88% 11.2996 2.7996 80.49% 6 68.75% 10.6596 23.44% 3.63% 7.8196 1.21% 84.50% 7 57.53% 6.90% 35.G2% 4.27% 6.85% 0.82% 88.01% 8 56.7696 7.84% 32.43% 4.48% 10.81% 1.49% 86.18% 8 46.88% 12.61% 53.13% 14.29% 0.0096 0.00% 73.11% 10 47.92% 6.44% 29.17% 3.82% 72.92% 3.08% 86.55% 71 80.00% 26.5296 17.14% 5.68% 2.86% 0.95% 66.85% 12 65.45°,6 9.75% 25.45% 3.79% 9.09% 1.35% 85.70% 13 55.86% 9.32% 39.6196 6.62% 4.50% 0.75% 83,31% 14 74.19% 8.32% 22.58% 2.84% 3.23% 0.41% 87.44% 15 67.42% 28.17% 28.09% 10.91% 4.49% 1.74% 61.18% Summa 84.88% 11.06% 28.42°6 4.86°/. 6.80 k 1.18% 82.92°,6 Cobr Codes: Red=I want to stay King County Oreen=I want to annex to Renton Yellow=1 havenY decided Assumptions: All analysis preseMed here is based on hand courrting of votes and parcels. Some easments heve been in couMed above as parce(s due to no abilily tor GIS enalysis of this data(another hend countinp probiem). Some non-votlng percels(schools/fires statloNperks)courtted ebove as percels due W�o abiliry for GIS•analysis of this date(enotf�hand couMi�g problem). Based on responses,vre estimate an average of 1.75 adults per parcel. PercerAages presented above DO NOT INCLUDE airy sewer comerroM rebrted data-people,parcels and survey responses onry. Total Estimated Aduft Population is NOT EQUAL to the Total Replstered Voter Population.Ony registered voters will have a final ofical voice at election, Known sources of accidental a unavadable error i�our metliodobgy include(but are probably not limited W): A few addresses thet should not have been included(oulside poteMialy afrected area)were included. A few addresses thet shouW have been I�duded where not included. The post office retumed some cards as undeliverable wFien they should have been delivered. Responses are e self-selected sample irtstead of a more scientificalty vatid random sample set. Conclusions: The low response rate(<18%)combined with the error inherent in a self-salected sample renders this date inwficieirt fw proposing an anne�tion boundary. The preet majwity of commerrts prompted by this survey came from addresses tF�t where we have n�wer been able to preseM daAa. The majority of these commeMs penerelly reflect the followinp types oi outofriate or enoneous understandinp of our currertt situation: This area is rural,always has been and aMrays wiN be. � King County zoning is rurat and ailows a lower ma�dmum development density than Renton for this erea. WheNif King CouMy reduces expend'Rures for services in this area,our taxes will also De lowered to match. King County wlll not reduca expanditures in our area. If we do nothiny,this issue will simpy fade away,a�d Kinp Cairtty and Renton will both let things stay Ney vray they have ahvays be¢�. Since this Initial Survey The results of this survey indicated to us that we had not been successful in reaching the residents.Since June 2005,we have held monthly meetings, open to all,where we have discussed the hopes arn!fears o(our neiphbors.AAo�oi these conversatfons have not ceMered on annexatbn per se,but have instead focused on the unde�lyiny concerns of the puWic.Throuph this open diaby,and by way of considerable email conversations with the 300F residents on our list,we have become ever more famNiar wiM the wishes oi the peop4e. The feedback that we have received wppoRs the boundary that we have proposed.A petition submitted by a member ot the ERPCC`to the Cky of ReMon at the time tMat our Petitlon To Annex was accepted.Indeed,we have mappe4 the location of all the addras�,es of the signers d tfiat petition.We found thffi of the 75 sfyr�s requestinp that e qr�ter area be included in the proposed boundary,72 are already i�ide tlie boundary that we have proposed, We do not betieve that the petition sfgners have sfanding in this matter and urge that their request be disregarded. Our 1#goal for where we sought a line was:to respect►he will of as many peopte as passible who waMed to be left our while meeting the requirements of the other annexation repulations.We dW not leava arry bgkal'slivers to simpy tedc oMo Me proposr.d area,and the commurrity Imown as Maplewood Heights is too iarge to consider merely an isolated(sland.Additionally,there is a per(ectly natural boundery for the finger to the noAh of SE 128th St. lvwvm as the Whke Fence Ra�ch area.At the sae time,we were able W mairitain e justifieble contigufty ratio wrth the e�dsting city boundary -ekher already exsiNng w already in Mre annexatlon process via the 80%Petfior�s.We are confldent Hmt tfie resideMs who wish M ask ro ba included OR exGuded are able and re�ponsible to make thefr wlshes�to you directly.We have shared notice ot this meeting with our Rst and especielly with folks who heve asked us the process by which they could properly preserrt their request. We are aware of Kiny County's recent swey elFort.We flnd they methodology to heve signficant Aaws.The rtwst serious of which is the indusion of the Eastwood areas alr0edy in the pracess ot annexation vle the 60%Petition method.It is true that these areas were already knovm to be in favor of annexetion,but thls is Irrelevar�t.Such areas can rwt be added to our proposed boundary because their prior applicetion tekes precedence over ours. We also believe that the survey questfons wer coMusing,possibly misleadinp.The Wllys oi enswers to individual questiorts are selFcaihad{ctory. Further,H Kf�g County hed found w119cieM legel end Iogical basis to pursue expanslon of the boundary,they had the rigM,tha oportunity end the obligeGon to invoke jurisdfctbn.They declined M do so.We believe this lack of adion speak for itself. Our Mnexation Committee has been the oniy eMity ad'rve in this entlre community.We have e coMad list of over 980 individuals.We have conduded � surveys by mail and in meetings,we heve heW monfhly meefings for 2 years a�d hanre had countless elechonic ard faco-tofiace convers�fons with our neighbors.We respect the professional opinions of the statF members from the two jurisdictions and of their consultaMs,but we believe that none of them 1� have the big pldure here. � To this poird we have done our best to listen insteed oF persuade.We see the cholce bafore us and all the rasideMs of our communriy as a criticaly ImportaM decision of povemence that must be the result of Irdamed end thoughtNl consideretion on the part ot exh individual.Our actual cempefyn etfort will beg(n ony aRer the final boundary has been detertnined and the election date eataWished. .i' v� 'ERPCC:East Renton Plateau Community Councii Subm(tted June 14,2006 by CARE Mnexation Committee PO Box 2936 Renton WA 98036 www.highlandsne(ghbors.com „,�„ Comments ta the Boundary Rev�ew Board regarding the propose�d annexation boundary on the plateau east of Renton. Some of these written comrr�ents were used for oral comment to the Board on 6114/06. Tom Carpenter, 15008 SE 139'h Piac�, Renton, WA 98059. I live in unincorpor�ted King County inside the PAA but outside the current proposed annexation boundary. 1 am also� member of � the Four Creeks Unincorporated Area Council representing this area and chair their Growth Managemerrt Committee. I have been a resident of this pfateau for over 25 years and have witnessed first hand the tragic consequer�ces of the buifd out that began in �arnest 6 years ago. I have a written statement that I will give to the Board right after my comments I expect to made part of the official testimony regarding the proposed boundary and current state of the annexation approach being used by the city and the county. !t addresses a number of issues that the Board, and other government agencies, need to be aware of as they attempt to move toward the annexation di the plateau into aenton. F'or my oral comments I would like to read a paragraph or two from that writing. The boundary being proposed was drawn as a workaround. IYs being done solely for the purpose of increasing the possibility of a favorable annexation vote. It fails to recognize that ALL the residents of the unincorporated area inside the PAA need to collectiv�ly express their opinions in the only meaningful way available, the voting booth. By the way, that comment is not to be interpreted as a criticism of any of the individuals wf�o tireless have expended heroic efFort to move the overatl process along. Quality of life ptanning and resource commitments are being held hostage to annexation. 7hese efforts ere workarounds that attempt to get the attention needed on this plateau, and that's just plain wrong. The process being used and the series of events set in motion over 12 years ago when the Growth Management Act and the King County Comprehensive Plan were put into place, including �„ the drawing of the Urban Growth Boundary that defined this entire plateau as urban, seem to be ignoring the historicai cha�acter of#his neighborhood, has forgott�n the citizens for the most part and set as prioritfes what is mostly a financially beneficial outcome for the county. The county's comprehensive pfan states that: U-205 King County shall not support annexatian proposals that would: b. Create unincorparat�d islands unless the anne�cation is prec�ded by an interlocal agreement in which the city agrees to pursus annexation of the remaining island area in a timely manner, Frorn a land area perspective, abaut a quarter of the remaining unincorporated area on the plateau is not included in the current proposed boundary. Admittedly it will not be in the shape of an"island”since it will be sunounded on only three sides by the city of Renton. But the remaining fourth side is air. To the south of the area not included is a steep cliff that drops down to the Cedar River and Maple Vall�y Highway, all of which is un-buildable. Beyond is another PAA of Renton's: Fairwood. But no such ihterlocal agreement has be�n put in place. The county's comprehensive plan is visionary enough to recognize the need for a transition plan for areas like the one on the plateau. Unfortunately, that planning has also not occurred in any meanir�gful way. To quote from the county's comprehensive plan, "The policies in this section�re int�nded to guide the county's decision making qn annexation-related issues to ensure the nqe�s of��ens �r ��urban unincoroor�d a�r�a are considared, and that a smooth transition from county to � city government occurs." WASMJNGTON STATE�pUNDA�Y REUIEW BOARD FOR KING COUMY 1 FlLE# d�3 ! IXHIBII'� � U-207 King County shali work with cities to jointly develop pre-annex�tion ag�reements to address the'transitian of service provision from the � county to the annexing cities.The davelapment af�uch agreements should include a comprehensive public involvement process. This has not occurred. In fact, at a very recent Renton City Council meeting, the council expressed a very high degree of frustration with the county over their unwillingness to enter into a pre-annexation inter�ocal agreement which, along with a Special District Overlay,would have established the framework for just such a dialog. Again quoting from the county's comprehensive plan: NA successful annexation initiative depends on establishing a collaborative and ongoing dialogue between the three affected interest groups: residents, the county, and the affected city." The judgment of whether there has been a collaborative effo�t is in the view af all three parties. 1 can assure you that most, if not all, will judge the efforts to date to be inadequate to create a meaningful transition ptan for this area. 1'his is particul�rly true because of a lack of voice from all the residents already invested in the entire area, not just whaYs included in the current boundary. And Renton, to be blunt, is not prepared for the annexatior�af this area and there's some legitimate question, particularly if the agreements and collaborative planning daes not occur, as to whether it will be abfe to prepare before implementation takes pl�ce. This is partially because of the numbe�and size of the PAAs that they have, however, they have only just recently begun the development of design standards for the area that are focused on preseniing the historiC character of the neighbofiood. Their tree-retention ordinance, which at last check has yet to be voted into law, is critical to an area with vast stands of 1 QO-foot tall fir, alder, mapte, cedar, and pine trees, but is too late to keep developers from stripping the land of all vegetation. Their plan for the major east-west corridor that runs the entire ler►gth of the neighborhood is still unfunded and not yet approved by the ci#y council. As a result, the build out that has already accurred is viewed by both citizens and Renton as tragic. And, even though the build out has often been permitted using c4unty regulations, Renton is still viewed as culp�ble and their voiCe, � representing the area they are intended to inherit through annexation, is non-existent with the county. The PAA we are addressing tonight sits right next to the land area with the single largest disproportionate share of crime in the entire city of Renton. Every citizen in this PAA, not just a subset defined by the current boundary, should have a right to vote, en mass, regarding decisions that will have a significant effect on their future. I understand that the scope and authority of the BRB is limited to boundary-related issues and my written testimony is not a labbying effort far or�gainst annexation or to point out current weaknesses in Renton. Personally, my purpose is not to take a position on annexation but instead to fobby for maximum citizen involvement in the process. I simply want to point out the magnitude and scope of work that must be done before any further actions, including annexation or continuation of the build out, can take place without risking the qualit�r of life enjoyed by the residents of this area. Quite simply, the required work as prescribed in the comprehensive plan, expected by the residents vf this neighborhood, and necessary to assure the character of the neighborhood is not tragically impacted, has not been carried out and that there has already been enough piece meal annexation of the area through the 60%annexation technique where a developer buys up enough property to become the majority fand owner and unilaterally votes to annex. Owners of 40%of the land value in that process have no voice, and developers admit that they take that action purely because of the favorable treatment they get in Renton compared to the county. I want every organization and individual involved in this process ta hear that the process designed and triggered by people,whether they be state representatives or county officials who acted over a dazen year�ago, or the current state, county and city o�cials, whether staff or elected,do not live in or�round this area and yet they somehow think that they, and they alone, know what's best for this neighborhood. Let the people, alt the people, speak. Don't allow the � 2 deck to be stacked in a way that supports objectives that have nothing to do with the quality of life ,� on fihis plateau. Let the people, all the people in the entire PAA, vote an whether they want to have Renton as their local senrice provider, the government thaf will represcnt tMem,and one of the most significant drivers af their future quality of life. Adjust the boundary to include the entire PAA and let atl the residents vote. Let the chips fall where they may, and then iet all the government agencies involved take the high road by listening to what the vote meant and deal with thak mess�ge If the citizens vote against annexation, which current surveys say that will be about 60-40, let's flnd out why and deal with it. But if we stack the deck by selecting a sub-area of the PAA just bec�use it might have a greater chance of voting in favor of annexation, we're excludin�a significant number of citizens from the overatl neighborhood from voicing their opinic�n in the only place I�ft where it matters, the palling booth. Do the right thing! Either reject this entire request because the county and Rentan have not fulfilled their obligations for a pre-annexation interlocal agreement and a collaborative effort with the citizens, the county and the city, or i�clude all the citizens in the unincorparated area of the plateau so their voice can be heard. And when they reject annexation, leam why they feel the way they do artd assure that appropriate steps are taken to deal with these concurs including the development and application of design standards more appropriate to the historical character o# the neighborhood, the creation of a substantive transition plan for the area, whil�pr�serving the fundamental right of citizens of this country to choose who gavems them and the quality of that government. If Renton, then much needs to be addressed What GMA, the county's planning policies, and the comp plans in both the county and the city of Renton fail to address is"What about the citizens and the quality of life in their neighbofioads?" �,�,, We don't know for sure why citizens would vote for or against annexation. The economics are turning out to be pretty much�push for the average resident. Many s�rvices, like water, sewer, fire, scho0ls, and haspitals are delivered through special districts which me�ns they won't change due to annexation. Police response times will probabiy get better. A couple contracts will be different, like garbage and recycling, but citizens will still hav�both collected regularly. But for the most part, the day after annexation citizens will wake in a wo�ld that will fundamentally be no different. So why do some people favor annexation and others don't? Much of what we've heard is that citizens wauld just prefer to be left alone which means left in the County—or-the citizens have strong feelings based on past experience with either the county or the city. Renton's reputation among those that have or are dealing with them is not been very good. Right or wrong, Renton is being seen as culpable in the horribly planned build out currently underway on the plateau, and Renton is seen as culpab{e in what it admits is the worst crime area in the city,proportioned to land mass, in the incorporated areas of the very same plateau where this vote is accurring. 7o paraphrase from the Mayor of Renton's recent State of the City report: Over the last 5 years a 360-acre Highlands study area, 2.4%of Renton's total land mass, and a direct neighbor to the PAA, has suffered a vastly disproportionate share vf the City's criminal aGtivity: - 40%of cltywide gas station robberies, - 24%of all v�hicle thefts, - 18%of pub�ic nuisance cases, and - 15°�of all the armed robberies, murders and drug-and alcohol-refated crimes in � the City, plus fully 3 ro - 2Q%of a�l the fire cails, aid calls, and code enfarcemen#complaints. All af this in just 2 °r6 of the Ciry's land a�ea! � And there's evidence that this situation is already permeating the PAA. Monthly, as a member of the Four Creeks UAC 1 receive a report from the KC Sheriffi that services the area. The historically relatively low crime area has seen all forms of crime grow at an alarming rate. This is what some of the citizens see Renton to be. Bu#the most important differences between the situation before and after annexation fall into the category of planning, codes and ordinances, and in the I�adership and vision of both the staff and elected officials. No matter how you cut it. No matter what all the hype is regarding why the counry and the state want annexations to occur,what it boils down ta for the citizens who live in these areas is quality of life. And that, unfortunately, is most influenced by neighborhood planning, codes and ordinances. 7he County's comprehensive plan makes it clear why the county has such a push on annexation. The county's policies are written in such a way that iYs in the best interest of the county to have these areas annexed. The comp plan specifically states that the county has a sign�cant fiduciary interest in having annexations occur. However, GMA is not going ta be successful until the urban areas are made highty attractive and livable. As things stand now, this quite residential neighbQrhood is being treated with just the opposite objective. Both the county and the city of Renton need to get their act together,stop the push just to get annexation to occur, focus on the neighborhoods they are effective, put the agreements and, more importantly, do the planning to get the right type of design standards developed with full and significant participation by the citizens with the greatest current investment in the area. � � 4 ��.r 10415 — 147'" Avenue SE Renton, WA 98059 June 13, 2006 Good evening: I would like to comment on the proposed Preserve our Plateau annexation effort. My name is Claudia Donnelly. I live at 10415 — 147�h Avenue SE, Renton. This is north of the proposed POP boundaries. It is still �vithin the PAA of Renton. In May 2005, a BRB staff person told me that all residents of the proposed annexation area should help decide the boundaries for an annexation. CARE didn't do that. I know, because my mother used to live on 156`h Avenue SE, Renton and she was never asked about the proposed boundaries. Other residents I have talked to also were not allowed to give their input when the boundaries were dra�vn up. What CARE did, I believe, is called "gerrymandering". I would like to ask that the proposed boundaries of this annexation effort be enlarged to � include all the remaining Renton PAA areas (Maplewood Heights, White Fence Ranch, my area, the proposed Aster Park annexation area, areas close to Hazen) that are still in King County. That way all the affected residents will be able to say "yea" or "nay" on whether or not they want to be a part of Renton. Thank you. � �� Claudia Donnelly WASHINGT�Pa,'�`�;�,:"�j�NDARY REVIEIN QOAf�D FqR KING COUNTY FILE#� G��3 � �.• EXHIBIT: �—{ To: The Citv of Renton � RE: Proposed Preserve our Plateau Annexation Area We the undersigned do not approve the proposed annexation area. This was proposed by the �ARE group without input from residents of the area. We do not want to annex into Renton and request this petition be reviewed by the boundary review board. Signature Address Telephane No. c �. � �`�Z s� 1. 1��c�2 /G7 ��s�: P�.�?��✓c,� �, xZ�--,3a�� ,� . � � i`r��G� / �``� � �.� l�e 7� l�� ' '�/`� �3a S � 3. �`2�� 1 �-5� 7��I (��(-� p,��t��ri�,WA,��o�i-7�i�-C� � ,. 4. � � z � - '�' . �-�� s. ��-2! �c - � e � C�r��s�s-� . 6. S.� / S'-- � 0.5� ,� �.__ � 7. � a.�" /�Gd v 5,c I � `�-'.� c.��c.� �c.�- �� g. � �as,� 4 � � I.t/ y o.s � 9. �(�G�b S= r�. W �1 0 - � at,��(��7�1� � � , 10. � '� � r ��(Z �I� �� jaN �� y��5 r 14 �- /�y, �� 7�' ,��. .�.= �,F ��s� _ ; -" � �t- �o��`� ��c 1�. �- �� L/�� /� 7 T� � �S�' /C� 13. C '� � 4 4tSc, ��t� �"c �t•t `,� � --�tm I�,'1) ��'' �% 14. �� , ` I t `��" ( �G� � l f% �.-��-�L�1.�.--��a �%�;J,��`�" 1 , 15. � ._..'_`=� 1��Z� I � i�`n. �l S t� � �. "�,il, '�,,;� �( r i..�`� `� t '.,;�i:=s}�I��Ti��V S1H�BOUNDARY � h�.�`��M1I�OARD FOR KING COU�111' ��# a�3 � owi�n: 7' ;� To: The Cit�of Renton RE: Proposed Preserve our Plateau Annexation Area We the undersigned do not approve the proposed annex�tion area. This was proposed by the CARE group without input from residents of the area. We do not want to a.nnex into Renton and request this petitian be reviewed by the boundary review board. Si�nature Address Tele�hone No. (��s 1 1. . " . /�f5'�2-�� ff s�"/u'n�� g��-9 �?�-�=��as- 2.��-�'�� J �Sl5�/� i�� '�S��.a�.ti r�<�s-,�, ��s'- z z�-�� 3. �f� ,.J � � - �=- / � �/��! s p��.�-.�''� � � 4. ''��._ ��, %�� .� �---' '�, ��1` j �,� �� , �= , ��1 ��j3� '`��3��? `. ��YaSti 5. _ - -� / (.��9 � �,�,, 6. '�' ' �-�� 6 � �' '`�� S�� z ,�,,� �— ��'� � `�S 4 j ��;�5 f� L�-tJ .5L_� �'��t /c:;�/t K-�r�-� �%�L`?5--� : n � / g. � .� / �� 3 S% /�� e.�,. ��L ��% 9. - ,'�i�[ v�--c,.2- ,,.._ � �.`-� � � -j t�' l ��)� ,�'�-� ��, �l- t 4:`�� G�I; i��`t� G�t�%C'� �' � � ° � , i ' �..,�. � , � 10.,�:�:..�-G -.�� G, � �� L: L z.,-�f��c �' �� ._, � _.. . 11. �- � �'��t,�'�-`L��"C�-��=�� 's j/ /�s- �t:.,��.�:: ��l=.. � �.�,.�..�Z� � �� 12 �� 13��`-, `7( ��. .� � �z 3�-� � -� �� 13. � �3 �� /�'��-��7� ; 1 i� / �f��j �, ��, _ ��. c�a�v . ,`�l ` `_ , < ' // / / 15°�.��=�-�?-�,�i�� l_i��--�� I �l 0�� ' (�1��/� � -(�`� � � To: The CitY of Renton RE: Proposed Preserve our Plateau Annexation Area We tr,e ur�dersi�n�d dc not approve t�he proposed anr�e�atior.area. This was proposed by the CARE group without input from residents of the area. We do not want to annex into Renton and request this petition be reviewed by the boundary review board. Si�nature Address Televhone No. 9�b�;y ��. � �(o�� 1S�' �� -{��Z�- � l� z,� � �J � - � � , , 2:" �; _�`. ;i,� � ��.�,�-- ' i/ �1 �� / 3. � _.'��;: � �._a..,> l �� `�� l �fi'f'�'� `� —�,�� -��. � � �Z�-��z��` S 4. �'��-t'� � �� !�-�' l��.,�( S b ,�L�z[t'i... �,J� L'� � r^ , , 5. ��i�. � � ��;s�� .�z � �� .�� , 6. ) (� S ��- � 1� ` " �4-��.�! 7:�...1 >, `<�. �`' - �'j'` �,s- �c�' � ✓d�- f� ��' �.�- �� 8��+� �/�/�%i�" i' r•�� f.% , <- / ^ � �`h -� 9.� .� � �',c.,� , �' � � •� n �,-- -�3�� 10.� - ��vn�Cti 2,' j`��,�.� 15� `��%� �� 1 ��'�� -�a��at� ttitv � l�. i�( c�. i 7" C, � � - � �, �Z�- �s�� Z�� 12.�� ,� � �� PL� �� C�, <��, � � ��f�7 l.7�1� 13. �1'�� ru.�1�1 �y`-14�1 15J �L SC P< �'� �Z,� � :Z77� �� ? , , .�, 14. z � � r `��( �� ` �_ .L � � o�: �< <(- I�� ; 15. � � , � � �� `� ,5�=- �� 7��Z�. � �,. To: The CitX of Renton RE: Froposed Preserve our Plateau Annexation Area We the undersigned do not approve the proposed annexation area. This was proposed by the CARE group without input from residenis of the area We do not want to annex into Renton and request this petition be reviewed by the boundary review board. Si Address Tele hone No. 1. l�6 s` S v� 2�,�__ � .,� � 2�� 2. l ��t�i; 1� IG,�..� (�S� �C�� t� � � 3 - � � r�� f'C, s�. `� -��r 4. '� � �0�- (P'7-!i�t �L �� 7�3;��(o�j s. l 43(� �f� �� S � ��-�2 Z �`�a 3 g � 6, � �� ` �� . � �1-L 5 �� J �� 7: , ti� � ,�° , f `J7-) — ��i r? �� ` ._ !�S �=�`�_5 '"��.s 8. l ��='� � / 5ri��`' /�-'-S �� ! T y�= ��`� L-�� 9. ��ll-i�� , ,,� 1�1�'( l �j I(,�-5 �l � � S� �.�.5 ��'1 �r'�-S'�.� lo. `� ' �� . ,� �� J- ;� l �,=��S'T _ �2.�-7�?�'.� r C �.. 11 ` �� S� �y�� J� � �.�y ��3 � 9 �- � �2. ti .�� s� �� i �� -�a��:, 13. ' R. .✓ 1�(�j Z.� I(�� C'T -�'� �n�; `j8:x� �:�5� :�:�"l-3�o , 14. � ��v� ��c,-v�.�. �. l�C��- S� 4�iw' �� :° ;�,tc�� 9��5�i 4Z%�'��7�� 15. 1 �t?v �, � CY ��. ��c.�� `��`��`7. `�Z�Z77y a � To: The City of Renton `"� RE• Pr�osed Preserve our Plateau Annexation A.r:a We the uadersigned do not approve the proposed annexati,�n area. This was proposed by the CARE group without input from residents of the area We do not want to annex into Renton and request this petition be reviewed by the boundary review boazd. Signature Address Telenhone No. 1.. `�� D % {� ��S S �'� i y ��.-�r s' � �7 t 2. ' � 1 �-� z �S- � � TQ�r 3. �i� / I�� , r S . !'J�;� 4 `,��-r�i�- �� 3 s� /Y� fT �.�� : f �=c' s�f� ---�-- 5. �.�Y ��+�z Ci-'�-�t-'`�� - _ �w�.�� J� i��'��- � i, - _l'""�.�� ,� ` � ` t � J� ,,..�� ,( � •`�t �/ �� „ l^�,j�. 6. �" '�1 , �� !� i `t - � '�' �`-'�'� � -- - � - � -=�- ` f :, �,`,��' S— �. �� '� �/�� ti � ' ` ` ' � ; � � y�%° _;��5i , �.---- i �� /�SC�/-i�2`� � �- o � � � � ��c � _�, �2 S S 3`��tv.Q.,S c.� . , - ---� � , �., i �,: - ,�r .� � � �` c:;, 11 � < <-�, r-�- ��%l�t--'Y4:(� �i�• %'�� -, ;r��v ` G.�_ :`7 C- /i["i��L'�:�: 5U �- . -� _-__. . . �C.�`�� y� �.� �� ,` Z��.�� —�� r2- --�:. ��.�� '�,;��t��. � �--ti � � ,, � � �� 13. ;L�..�,,1 i t �` �� 1� �ti \�c,��L `�.� �' �� ,.•� � 4 2S-2^i i-O 4Z.4- t4. r ' c��5 Z- s� t �' L ��. ��, w�- �8G�9 _. � , ^ � , ..: ts. � �I� � ��.,��11-�j'�'�kz� � � To: The Citv of Renton RE: Proposed Preserve our Plateau Annexation Area We the undersigned do nat approve the proposed annexation area. This was proposed by the CARE group without input from residents of the area. We do not want to annex into Renton and r�quest this petition be reviewed by the boundary review board. Si�nature Address Telenhone No , �/ , , w�7�G� ��m� i�� :�.c -Il�S��'-1'z,��:�� 7�� t 1��a�-� �=�� `1 ,...�- ' / / - �� 1` _- �z�Y��G} /W� ��`-S�i �,��[2:•�/Gf�w.S` �LS/ G-t�-� �T•.�i `� 1�L.,_. _v�•` ! 4. 5. ;,,�,,,, 6. '7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 1 S. � ��. --� ,A�� ,., � ��-� . x��. � � � �� L�� June 14, 2006 ` - . ',�--el��'�.. �=--�� To: The Boundary Review Board Re: Proposed Boundary to Renton Annexation I reside at 18257 S.E. 144th Place, Renton, Wa. The area we live in is called Briarwood. We are just within the urban boundary for the proposed annexation to Renton.. Our property is .75 of an acre and has considerable road frontage. The charge to hook up to a sewer for us would be prohibitive. The cost of paying our water/sewer bill in summer months if we watered our yard would be enormous. � �1 as`t ��,^-a��r-7�'v�_r r�.y-�. �� ' � /�.�Y�. Drainage is very good in our area so septic systems are very effective. It makes much more sense for this area not to have sewers. I have personally spoken to many living here and most in the Briarwood area do not want to be annexed to the City of Renton for this express reason. The vote this fall for annexation will have a much higher yes percentage if this area is simply excluded from �, the annexation boundary. � At one of the annexation information meetings we were told by a City of Renton Utility person that The City of Renton will put sewers in all of the Renton area eventually. It was indicated that it would not be soon; however no promise was made, nor can it be or should it be. I understand that new developments are ready to go in both North and South of Liberty High School (very near us) soon after the present sewer moratorium is lifted. Thank you for considering my request. Sincerely, ��-r �..� �.� c�� U� l � Loretta J. Me r �.�-� f �; �.- 18257 SE 144t" Place - � / � �� Renton, WA 98059 j�- ��'�'�f ��` � � E-mail: Lorettameyer9@aol.com � d �� `a� �-f` � `� `�`�� ; .��a � �' � �'1 N r E' cv v�E' �� I�� 'i_C � ��{ivL�-C..L� CBt.�� -'L{,L, / � �. WAS INGTQ1V STA �' y�� u�� e.� - �c�,� �cL -c�- C� ��e�e � �° ,i�I�OAR,�@R KING COUNIY �LE# ��f �� r,�-� ��'°�,��'�� f��-.-�� NB?f':� 7�l '� � � �/7�.�� . �. � .�' r � � . r�. ..-�,� �.- /. _ . . June 9, 2006 � To: Boundary Review Board Subject: Proposed Boundary for Annexation to City of Renton 1 r I am residing at ! �5 15 `" 1�.� � S� . This is just within the proposed annexation area to The City of Renton. It is my wish that this area be excluded from the annexation. My main concern is the enormous expense of the sewer line, once it comes to us. Our property, as others here in Briarwood, is relatively large and, therefore, the expense of sewer hookup is prohibitive. Also, the monthly bill thereafter would prohibit the necessary summer watering of an area this large. There are other concerns, also, such as the taxes on utilities, change of address, etc. S incerely, �r y��Q c�� t � � I�A�NINGTON 5��'E BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD FOR KING COUNTY � F1LE# �3 / ��T: K � - �� / l��C7��% 1-INDt� C.e�l�L it�M�S ; /833-�- aS� /�5 - - : �?��t�-o� C�� 9�os� :�� N Df�� R��i�c..� ,�o��.D : l �1 V� 1I11sI�� 7�t� �3c��1�� Y f�N,D : _�lSH _� - �,� \ �X C°�C�,�. �y�' 1��J� 1S _ �- ff��s�S ��1�1 7tt� ,��G� �F ?��5�' : ��y - l Ll 1�� f=� � e�-1/I�l UT� �►�f�f� �0�-1 . IQ�I'�(TC�I�I. lT lS S'O �f-�� 49(�c��-?-�' �;� . ff�-1l� /1l b7�-tlN 6 /l�! Co�-11/C�I�. � � � � s,��r�� . 7��1� �s �uo r, C�n��R A�r y �oNv��N� . GO1�_6 � ��C C�� '�I�T�I�f�S' ��-��S(.�,�PL� - - : / �C��_' 7� C.�6�-I�l T S��.c5��s ��C��tf� 1��R� : ��1�R f �-}�i f� ��aR �r Tr 2��! �-�� -,� J M� - : �`�S T C�5 a C�� e�� ly� C�c�� ,� �-01�� Df=- : �O �r'��' �(.��:..�5 e..�c`�c�t� /��.5� ��ll�l� ��ls� : C��NI Z��r��l C��iCN ��c�c� ��i�v 7� : ��.�f�X� �t��3 c.�t��t�-N �-►0�-�c��'tt��. l�S' � ��f�.� 7� �3� 1�1�_ �� IY ��I�. : C'�I C� �� F�� k�� 7Z� ��u'� . �(��OUNDARY ; ��?� �r.c��C��, R E N IEIN BOARD FOR KIN�COUNTY � # .�� . �- C�rn� June 9, 2006 � To: Boundary Review Board � Subject: Proposed Boundary for Annexation to City of Renton I am residing at . This is just within the proposed annexation area to The City of Renton. It is my wish that this area be excluded from the annexation. My main concern is the enormous expense of the sewer line, once it comes to us. Our property, as others here in Briarwood, is relatively large and, therefore, the expense of sewer hookup is prohibitive. Also, the monthly bill thereafter would prohibit the necessary summer watering of an area this large. There are other concerns, also, such as the taxes on utilities, change of address, etc. Sincerely, ' � �SZ- Gv� 1�. � z�d� l � � �� J�� - Il � ��,�� c��- � ��S � � _..__- WASH(NGTON STAT�BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARp FpR K1NG COUPIIY F�LE# �3 � Do-�►� M � June 9, 2006 � To: Boundary Review Board Subject: Proposed Boundary for Annexation to City of Renton I am residing at f�5�i z /�..��,.�/��- -r�� c.,f'o � . This is just within the proposed annexation area to The City of Renton. It is my wish that this area be excluded from the annexation. My main concern is the enormous expense of the sewer line, once it comes to us. Our property, as others here in Briarwood, is relatively large and, therefore, the expense of sewer hookup is prohibitive. Also, the monthly bill thereafter would prohibit the necessary summer watering of an area this large. There are other concerns, also, such as the taxes on utilities, change of address, etc. Sincerely, -� �k��0-� � � x�� -'� -� , � �z, �/.�� Q-' " -z.�� , �� .� __-_ .� �� .,.�� -� � � ��>� � �-GZJ � /�� - r � ��'�,��,'�1;��'T�i��'T�1E BOUNDARY `��VVBOARD FOR KI(VG � AlF# � � �UNTY ��a�r ,'� June 9, 2006 .� To: Boundary Review Board Subject: Proposed Boundary for Annexation to City of Renton I am residing at �1.�'�;,0� �� S� �C�� . This is just within the proposed annexation area to The City of Renton. It is my wish that this area be excluded from the annexation. My main concern is the enormous expense of the sewer line, once it comes to us. Our property, as others here in Briarwood, is relatively large and, therefore, the expense of sewer hookup is prohibitive. Also, the monthly bill thereafter would prohibit the necessary summer watering of an area this large. There are other concerns, also, such as the t�es on utilities, change of address, etc. Sincerely, � ��,�..Q� �. �° WASHING�01�STqTE QOUNDARY REI/IEUVV BOARD FOR K1NG COUNII' F1LE� a�3� EXHIBII: � � June 9, 2006 � To: Boundary Review Board Subject: Proposed Boundary for Annexation to City of Renton I am residing at ��"a a Q ' ��/� �� • . This is just within the proposed annexation area to The City of Renton. It is my wish that this area be excluded from the annexation. My main concern is the en rmo ous expense of fhe sewer"me' ,I'�onc'e it oc mes o us��property, as others here in Briarwood, is relatively large and, therefore, the expense of sewer hookup is prohibitive. Also,the monthly bill thereafter would prohibit the necessary summer watering of an area this large. There are other concerns, also, such as the taxes on utilities, change of address, etc. Sincerely, , i�'��rliyYl,�i`.�i`1� ��. �,,�� WA�FiINCTQN�TATE�QU�DARY R�VI�IN�pA�q FOR �ICdG COUNIY �1L�� 2-02�'/ �XHf�I� � `'� June 9, 2006 � To: Boundary Review Board Subject: Proposed Boundary for Annexation to City of Renton tJ I am residing at ��,'��'��3'�-�., �,C� . This is just within the proposed annexation area to The City of Renton. It is my wish that this area be excluded from the annexation. My main concern is the enormous expense of the sewer line, once it comes to us. Our property, as others here in Briarwood, is relatively large and, therefore, the expense of sewer hookup is prohibitive. Also, the monthly bill thereafter would prohibit the necessary summer watering of an area this large. There are other concerns, also, such as the taxes on utilities, change of address, etc. Sincerely, �� ..F � _ � �� INASH�N�Tt�N ST�TE BOUNDARY R�IEIN�aA� FqR KING COUNTY �iL�# �� / `� EXNI�I't� � �• . r 'c/ ft�iit f��tii�it;:i�h:= i.f�ia�*�`:�irE�J�'E3u��'e_p4,��_i';�C=��Y�^^S�i�&�1��!d�!°ia'��*fe4��,�cf.3€i��3S3�4��i�rz;x is�;a��a��€�� a��;��{�fin�#��r��?°��€�``��-�:��a�r�C��` �� ..��i�.�s�". � �;r�.� ��.R L c��c��i��.rr� �s�:i��i��f'� ar� i�`�e:��vva��.��c��t� tiwAiSt,skx F�k .£.+lGi�r A.ti$�`ev ykF+l+��. �xit.�'�,ir#iY�SNi✓�i 6=�in K4A�BrGi 411:k\i �r� �'4�b.+llkf$.1J. d VLS.IY.i✓�dA �`�9.��1✓� {,Ft ��:�,.°�-.; !s'i#`:� ?�`�.sY„{_nf•v_ z��§�� ri�ri�� Y.,�t�1'.�.`�'�'�.S.alt��i'1<.:ki.?��,I:'�'.��I?�-`�}.4��.��;'.�:T��'IP r�� f��;_ ��, ��r� ��,�i��c��c� t�.�:��_�� +�.��c��:��ts,-��r�� rf��c��a��:�;€��_� ��. "�'��.;� €��;��r� ��!��x��t�� a�., ��t�� i�t i;��r.��-��t�°�+;�c��r r��. ��.��t�� i�u��l ��€�,�s�.�r��>nt��cr��t�;��v��c� irt ��c�r c��z��r��.��r� t�e� ��.t��'i�;��'�°��i��, � WASHINGTON STATE BOUNDARY REVIEW BOAHD FOR KING C4UNTY � �iLE# f �JWI61T � . � ,Y . q/ /�/ i��lY�L..., lA/�� S`S !/"�Ol'�i C:.� �' _�"� �'�' �t V\�, ��..�._;�� E r'1 1 �--��1- ,'`� � �"t g'��_ �,`�; `'',:� �-,� . t, � � �� ' � � -� ..�:�1� i��,�c ► �� `-�-�� aa. (,��h�;� ��vz. ' �� %� l�l�� 'G 5 � `—�?� �� 3y5�j [� 3�? � �� r !.� ., i. t�'� '7`�F"Le..-� , � �-�L� � ��/�� /lZ.S�_Z�--� ��.G7J+Z. � �-C� -��-�j . `� J � ��l '� (�f�'T�p� S� ��-J-�SS- 2�3 �' :� � e,�� _ � ��,�,_�.��e�=��.s�s�� /�.3(�, 1�� L. �� {� -��c�'� .. . _-: � �hG��c� �� r�P�oa ��'�� (,� S� ��a�-�� - �aa� � .:: �c ��e�� c.�bad�� I�/'3�.Z I S't�P� S c �� 7/ ...��,�`" i, s� — � , / � 1: �7 `� C.a�-��,.�� ;��.� - �--6 -�� .� ��3�, �. �� Pc s� �'�s��T/- �� - ..,--� � _ �h _ f � :.: c� � �e � �� l�� l .5� �1��5 -��s� , � `j'r r '-- - � J ��— �U�-!`� -- I�� c_ S-� �P� a�-� -�-c�� - - � -�i-- =�,��/! - � - ��'I a �l�-8 L S� '� _ � _ _�3 —:�Y_— — ____ _, , . � � J er/�_:___ _ ��ZF�j �`��C �� /25 Z3S—��(p G,n � ' r� / i - � �_4_ �� - �-v� .; � � � ,: � . . _ - _ � ��a�y� � �� _ �'.�� . �.E, �a�-�ss- d�s __ _ _.,� �`�' �1�J►,�� l-� �! 1 5 � "l � `f �_ - ��5 -zs's/z�� / � _._._ ,__��,.,�,.��' �g - - f � -�:� _ _. _ _ ---- -- �d ;.! --- - - ___ � J :.: � � :.: � 3 ... _ �.� �f ._. _ ___._. _ _ � - _.__ , ;j • r i ;_� / V�=( n� L /�G�_c-1 �'�'s S ��1�h G ��- - -_-�i ,, 1'�i e vl�'a� � , �°i �c��.�� . % �f`f a ��!�' �, ��? i�� f°zs --��"�`'?3 :; �%��' . �- �x �-N r� ��,� c� �rr�a N l�-ro� s� � ��t�� P� �2��- � �3 � C� � 3 � � ' .�"r�, �.��u G �� u�� `�-�s 5� � y-��`G�, �- Z� 6�� G 3� _ _ C ,�� , ' y : ' � � - j45�7 �4�� P� 5� ��.�" �7�- a��r _ ,,. _ .:, , �! ` �� G�.-��.� � �/ -/�Y "�-,�� S�� s�-�7�, �� _ ;;� S. `; �` , > - -_ � _:i� . �a�,��rT ��f�a5 j��r��'L �`�-- ��`� �'�� 5_=' ,.: � - � - ::� �'� � i`�� i�+� -��. � Z�� 7�+�-3�70�7 _ . , c_ � :; �J� �,J� �J �r�� /yS'-��' /`f�� .�� y;�� a2� °��/o> , � , F� ::a _ _ - - ,;. , . ` j : �� r " VY_V"" `�_ "WV�'"`✓ 1�.52� � l J ! a� 9 _::a � - _ _ �15 � z � �� .��Y�-�`� �� i� � '� � - � � - s� .��' � . �� _ _��{�.�� _ s��s � ��i �� a�� ._ _ . _. _ _ _ � _ : � . . ► 2 ;;� I�"s►�- ��=3 �-- � S �4`z � , _ _ ..� . ._--- ----- --- .� -- --- - - !�-�=_ _ Y�'' �- z zz� z , ti , ��,� ,r . . ;. . / 3 A ' v°�� s� h _ _.`-[zz3 l�a�,.,��--< 5�.. �_S �z7�. _�� - .-- ..,.__ - -' -�� _ . _ �`( - ..::lJcG� ..�11� � ►�C v�i�� (�f y_GS S�� I�r'-zh`��'L �l LS- 'z��(-c zar, -.., -IJ - �� ; - __ ��_�'�(� � .� ( (�-f�l � S�-I`� �'� � � � 2 �� `�?��-l� Zf' ,; �� -:' � `��f(� S� 1 �2�'�'Q�� 25'- 22�-�� . �7 _,;C �n� ��l �,, ��,,,, - {��-� �-D �� -��.�� -.s-_ �.-�g-z si� � �� ,_�� — ��-I � _- �.-��" �� L ��5 �-,22 8� �5 I 6 , rq =;�Q� ��s� ,-f4 -- 1��i9 �� w� s� �z>- �3� �`f� . _ - � -- - _ _ _ ��-- � �- �� -yka-oa5 !� Z� , ,�� t .i��a� i�� la� � ` `�,;�� '1'-(. ��1�,�%`.��;� ((_:�7_1,t [�{�-[�` ,�- ��- ?�is;'��l��'�.�7 r � �� I� � �� 6' S��,Z � `��3�J � ,� -:: , ��C�a �i� _�� _(s �� / S �� 3 � �Ovl�,�- � �rz 1 y�i� /�/�-��5� ��;-��(0-�3�.� �� , � � ;� � /�.�/� ��.s,�' �.�.� .�.�� /� �} � � � `� `� ;; i ��-t.. � -�l�c �� :,� i `�-1��` t r�� - ('1 <,� K�� '.� � =� � � :.. � f,��cc�� i��z i ��' �l �� i��)G�s-�� .:: ��=� �� 1.�,� -IU-� �I�� .�`�' ► s� �y��f �� , � � � � � � �.,� , �; �� t _��= � �-�7; —�.��.� .., �� . ;� . � � , • r �, . " . ., . :.z >`��vi. �- _ ��o��re�� ,a�e � `'"'' ' - _��Z�f` ��'c�`�- lG�/'� 'C /�1�,�1"tf`/,��_ �� ,��y�`�'dZ_ � �- ._��' �'� ' �� ir�' � � l�_� s��= /�5��_ r� �-/ �- sl � ,�� - ��y � � ---- ' � /y7�z7 S� l ��`��f �� --3�5�. _ � .�` - _ �� s�� . � . . , y Z--� __ .__ �� _ ...;�,,. C,,.,Nr--�-_s - � /!%-� ,u. u 2, � � �'j/ � -- 1�_...�r� �L..f_c�z��-� � � �' / ;, � , � yay S _. _. �!� �/ �rz. ,�1`�_t.�- .__ . �.`�f �. '_.. � � '�2�=67�� , _-_ - ,� . .� / �� - / � y� �_. ,�c . � . � _,�� _�-- S�G� � �'r--i- _l� �1� ��_ 1�� " - 7 � � � 1�.1V �. S ��-l r� z�� - �E �, �� _ . _. - - ��;_.S-�� -g :; ..�c�-�� L � ��w �S -1�-' ,- � � .�� v�Z_S� ��5'c� � - � � �� ,_ - - _.._.9 �:,,f�iee� l�� ar�a�-�o( l��C� C�a � �-�e .s��. ��}a��-3�-(Z , J_o �.-�. �� 'l �--- �`��/� l��`�� - , yzs- zz � �i�s F! - - - _ -- ��--�1, 1 �Z 1 � S� I �� -��. _ �J __. _.. �. _ -�- - -_ _ - - _ � . _ �z ___ .___- ---- - -- � _�� _ �� _ 1��-��, �_ �5 ,a�s.-8o�3 , � �� . � � � � �y��9 �� - - ._ _._ �-.,e..- _�� / �� `f � � - - , - � I � � ys�`' �. ��-Y6Q�7 y... �r�/ � _ �� I ��s�, l. �I._s� �_ .$) - _ ,c �� « <� � �, ��---- (.�- -- �' S�� ` � l� __:. _ j�i�� /�/S,�G ,�'�= (/a.�� `i'as-��7� �-----' � 7 --- �- v�u�/s" /5�zv� l��"� �L , S,�. . ��z�� .Z z�--�o9�s .. � � -��'_--� ° ,�I �� - v _ ��5-- ��Z- 74�7� _ . � _ � � 1�2�y5' �y�-�,= 1�', sr y2s-��y- �� Zl . ___ q ,.. - - zo ._: '�.��. �, �� 1��s �- �� s E ��s a�I � 3� �� __ �, 1�� PL � ��s �� z z .:. �� ,�� >�.�s� �� P� �� . �a��g�a -s��.� , .� `= � e�� ,?�- �c. �.��--�a�- ��5�'" �.. � ,f� � / , � � °�� ..``.Jk�l d1/�'C�(�� (C�91�t�-' j`�:� 'G /`-r� /"l a,�, .t,��j- �Z.�Y-1 ��2 �' � r�s:.. �Q�G�-�' -� �a�� 0 e. l�Z`�� 7-� �� l �� 5� ��-d(ol 7 �.---- n n :� �c� . /'' �� 1 � l�/��a�� ; /x � �� .��. �� ` 2, � /�' iyZoz ��/6} �l � �zs �`7/- (�� ( �° � ... �i�c�/� ��. Co�, (.�� /��i ��' f `� /�l �.i C `? ? ° 1?�� --`��f'�� t . ,,...��.��.. . . �� .. , �, � � � � �;, � "�'!��, ,r��. �:�� t� ''�^a s°�`�� a y�° �. �, - " °� � i h �,, �v r • �� ..Oii*� �,� '�, ��C* ;{,,$ �,uo- �`� ,� � � y 4rv.� �§ ,,8� �ry �a1��,� , �� + � i _, T, �;t '�� f�� .� }�; q Mk �. � � ` „( ��;�n^ �. i� ',� �4�� '�px� ii�+�,.�?: <,�-; �''�+"��p,` � �'t�a �� ,t: ' .�„t �. � ��.;M+.; �, � .�� `.i +�� i�k;� �., � ,.,. � °� � p�'�`;? _. �� r ` P .�'9: � . -� wf�"�� '� "� y�_ '2:,f;f, , �µ ��, ` ;��`�� .,�' - ��, 3 �� f, a d' r: ��r�'r` a • �� , �� '�:� ,��, � a�� .'�� r� � t� -ti � �.�A` �1 ��:� , _��. � � t � y+��;µ�� "�� &�s� _ Y Aa , �"' ., "p'. + ,�� '��_, - . R , '� �`' �!� � � � � . ,. � � - - . � �'�"�iF�y�'�� ° .t�. t' M a � � ;yi 4. � � � d gb 1 , �,� ' Yx .�� ^ ' �r ' '�si�M.�� _ ' :.; � �',.� ..._ , ��,�,xa, _ -:a.�;'"M xY�„� r �,s,7!. � F't, 4�J� 5� ' ��'��;;`,�""•�. �t " :��. e, s� ��' � � � a �" »,'� " .�� *� ': � ��- �� ,� ' �- � �- � �' � � ,�, `�, �� _ s � � � � Y,� � . � � �:a ; .; ,�.�� - .. �,., „u -.;.._: . .. _ �� .�� ;,, � � �� d ' � ti� �,� �"� � �� y"�—� �.t � +�`• a � - s"�� , � `�,, � � �� , � `, '�„' . �, �,, �a tit," 3 � -�,t'c�' �� s 1t'? r'� � �,��; }� �r � '� �¢� � £''+a �. '��,�J�� '�i�� j � k '"A.•; ��'.'' � '� � �:,F y¢y �S-�� 4��r` S , ��F� ��" � b ,y � , y, . � F ^c �Y{ � �y..' h, ' ^�.+4. �. .,.'�^:.�b� AR"F ,,, .. -�!1 rMJ,.. ��t� � . iF, �h� N., � � 7 � ' �� 'i � . , '1� .�. - y �� r�� ^ a, �';°; �`i�� r g � �� i � `r'.� � ; '� (w «s � � (' ��I � ' "� � � � € � r = ,� � � � " _ � �.< ,� r, �,;, "�s f` � � „� .- ..v:� r�. . � ,A� ' �i< �h. F '�� {,,, � � `� ,. � � � 'l� . � �' �_}�- ,.�s,�1� , . � - L 1 ' ��$ r ry �`.. he 'i 4S w99mw �v i -Ji �x'_�IE•l*m � � N �k", , �. ' ��,t 8.� v- - ' � } t a � 9k� � . ,w�'ia' ^ � ��`F- ,� i � . , � � '�r`.;i �� Y , ; y"��w�,,,,+�n£# tk,�.!" y'^.."�^at5 Y �1 �.� � � � i{�� f� � �'��[°4 "r''M ,- q f ,T'�, E s R"i� \M,� ., � �1 } *, , ' .,i � , �.�o �'�' � 4 � � :$ 4Y F" ,� ��q�,, 4' 1 ��'� �`�.. � � , ��4Wle� �& a. � `�' , - " � { ,� �. '. P � ,� �rl�'C` � c•g�S i�1 � p�, Nh. �,r. �- �'jT ";.� � � y5 , ,k ...�� .,. � �ry.0 ��. Y � . , '� ��'. .,, , �� ,� ,Wk ' _' ��fi � _. � � � � . _ �� 4��'�g �+e�^+ ��, p,�v,� t �,�,,,., y ,� 6 ,�i�,: a n � �, a � ,�� , ,� K � � ��p ;�c4 y „� ^ � � � ,',A; . c 'x'�^' o- t , tx�y, �.. , yi, �i�1 N�� i� '��r Y;�� t �� r r � ;" d �;o + N -, :L%Si 7i '» , � „��!Pp 5, E' �t`..�,li ��dE� . S � � • l3•� 2 4 �kZ '�� S:° :.r; Voice Your CJpinion About Annexation What are These Meetings? �� lM hUVhy Now? services. King County no longer provides these services. A chance for East Renton Plateau residents to • Regional Policy Encourages Annexation. • The County established an Annexation discuss wishes and concerns about options State law and King Counry's Countywide Initiative in 2004 to: for annexation to the Ciry of Renton. The Planning Policies encourage annexation of urban meetings are hosted by King Counry and the areas to cities. Ta implement these policies, , �� Encourage cities and urban unlncorporated Four Creeks Unincorporated Area Council (UAC). King County and cities are working to annex � area residents to discuss and plan transitions Renton elected officers and staff will attend. or incorporate all areas in the urban growth to incorporated status in the near term. boundary by 2012. � Make available funding and resources to help The meetings will identify the future options for the East Renton Plateau. • East Renton Plateau is Urban, and Renton cornmunities take steps to deterrr�ine tF�eir is the Designated Service Provider..In own future. • Two meetings are designed to give people 1993, King Counry decided as part of Growth o Help accomplish the region's land use vision inforrnation about how and when annexation Management planning to designate the Plateau while addressing King County's long-term could eventually occur; about chaices as "urban" in its Comprehensive.P.lar� This. budget challenges. between services provided by incorporated King means: 1) growth will occur there and 2) urban County or those provided by Renton; and about services will be provided in the future. Under �/hat Will Happen? growth policies of the Counry and the City. counry-wide policies that direct how services • The third meeting is a community conversation Will be provided, Renton agreed to be the future . Today it is not clear whether the majority of to focus on: service provider,'and made the Plateau part of Plateau residents are for or against annexation. its Potential Annexation Area. The type and These meetings will likely generate a variety of � Will the Plateau co�tinue to annex level of services provided will be determined by responses �bout annexation, with some in favor incrementally to Renton as f�as been the choice residents make about governance. and some against annexing the greater area occurring for the last few years; or • Growth Will Continue.The Community Can now, rather than seeing continued incremental o Will residents seek annexation together as a Participate in its Design. Land development annexation. community through an election? envisioned in the Countywide Planning Policies� • 1 � . ;._ , has continued since 1993, and � growth will continue to occur � � �', � 3 f.T � � �_-• '' , , ' ,_ � whether the area remains �. . , ,�, � �.�,�T,�. � _ � . . . � . unincorporated or�oins the ' "_ � �Tl�launl � • � .,..,1yM�, � ,��,\� I -Y�.. i�: ,. , . -- ► = � � r. '. --,,,�„.� Ciry of Renton.Althou h the E � .., , �JatHS � SE�deru � � J � ._..� i?ISrH ' �� ..',�'��.',T. .. : �, -„ � � -- , ' '7 �--:, ._,. � _` area has historically had a rural v ,.. � $� " � � � -. � �� "feel" and many residents live. � - W :" �� . ' ' � x �' -' �� ` � .. , � . � .. .. � . . ,` , � , ��==`-=' ¢I : ' _ � - < W < here because they want'a rural ��<:'- _. � SF,. . < , = t � " I d > �; <: =: � .-�-'� ; _ ��,�a�= � ifestyle, under adopted City an � - �u� ,_, . � ' ��.. �:.� „ County Comprefiensive Nlans, � y��' �-- ' ��` �the area is rban and slat d � �� ,� � � � �� u e � � �" t ,,�- S�^''" i�,.,.-.� ° ��r to have urban development ; •�� •� � ��'; �.�./ � �� . . �y�; ,„ „. � patterns. Renton does coniinu� � , ; `°rti ktNrbNM� o.t�a� N 1�~�-. to offer cornmuniry planning ' �,,,� .� �, -� American., "''+h Disabilities Act: Individuals requiring reasonable accommodation may request written materials in alternate format � Accommoda tions:Language translation or child care services can be arranged on request: cal{ Paul Zitarelli of Berk&Associates at 206-324-8760. Maii-in Survey ; � �:�� , �� If you can't make it to any of the meetings, : � � o � ��y�-N ��' ��- �-.` you still have a voice. : �'� r� � � _� � � t. What local government services are most ' �N � D a: o important to you? (Rank if yau choose- 1 means ; �� ✓� � D �, _. .` � ' ;� �,_ ,, � , , � ,,'< most important.) : �� '�, N ° rt ��yy �� '��- Y�. � �14� N � �� S1 �I�•�'v ❑ S�dewaiksJStreets/Roads ❑Neighborhood Prograrns : ��r°' ��,4'�* � c . ``� . " ° ` °� =e.p�.��'� _ '`� �� : F � r�°.. .t<. . �� o � �Ci�N ��:s:�of Re�i�ta� ��.��` ❑ Design/Zoning Standards ❑Fire&Emergency ; o � , Medical Services ; �� " "` ❑ Ho4v developmenr is : � happening ❑Schools : � ❑ Permitting ❑Library ; �' : �� King County and the Four Creeks Unincorporated ❑ Police ❑Water&Sewer : Area Council welcome you to discuss the future of the � �arks/Recreat�on ❑other : � East Renton Plateau under the Growth Management , � �� * _.- Act. Join representatives from King Counry and the ❑ Economic �)evelopment : Z iA�, * � City of Renton at... : � N� » = 2. The Piateau has been experiencing a lot of : z �� w Community Open Houses development. What do you t hin k a bout t hat? ; � � � � = D = � � Both meetings have the same format. ; � C * � Come to whichever fits your schedule. . om * � • cr, � � _- ; co m * - Meeting 1 . � m e Tues. October 18 - 6:30-8:30 pm � ; n = Briarwood Elementa 17020 S.E. 134th St. � _ ry - 3. Name your top 3 concerns about annexation. y � � Meeting 2 ' n = Wed. October 26 - 6:30-8:30 pm , '�o� s Ma y wood Middle School - 14490 168th Ave. S.E. .� ' � Then, discuss next steps at a... 4. If i had to choose today, I would: ; -� Community Conversation ❑ Stay Unincorporated : �D �� ❑ Annex to Renton Z�D o� Meeting 3 � w p m p D� Thurs. November 3 - 6:30-8;30 pm � Maywood Middle School - 14490 168th Ave. ;.�. Your input is important.Please answer these questions and mail by ; p D m° Nov i5th to: East Renton Survey�120 Lakeside Ave,Suite 200/Seattle, � °' ��1�'A 98122. Or e-mail ihem to eastrenton@berkandassociates.com ; . t � ' - �1�=� �.�'..�, (/C/(� / � / City of Renton Annexation Analysis: East Highlands l�C-;,� �U' � �, �% v�� . . ��`� , ;; � EAST HIGHLANDS ANNEXATION ANALYSIS � '� Operating Costs Total �, , Police Services ' $738,000 �j��'`�.J�' �" ` ';S '` ��~��'"� r'1 , Fire Services z $0 Planning, Building and Public Works $962,000 Communi Services $617,000 Administrative, Judicial & Legal Services $181,000 ,�� '1 C =; �,.�,'"� ,� .. ;_. �``�: .�;'' r�<� , Finance and Information Services $1 18,000 Human Resources & Risk Management $25,000 Economic Development $139,000 Legislative $5,000 Staff-�elated Facility Costs $754,000 TOTAL COST $2,939,000 Operating Revenues Property Tax $2,260,000 Gambling Tax $0 Utility Tax $620,000 State Shared Revenues $245,000 Sales Tax $157,000 Sales Tax-Criminal Justice $146,000 Fines & Forfeits $74,000 Recreation Fees $54,000 Permit Fees $210,000 Cable Franchise Fees $62,000 Business License Fees 3 $2,600 TOTAL REVENUE $3,830,600 Loss of revenue from FD 25 4 {��0�,0{7C)) NET REVENUES (S��',4p0� ' The expenditures for Police Services assume no impact on administrative expenses and Auxiliary Services(jail costs). 2 The Fire Services expenditures for Renton will not change as the City is a/ready providing fire services to East High/ands area under a contract with Fire Dist�ict 25. Certain services, such as Fire Investigation, Fire Inspection, Plans Review and Public Information are current/y provided by King County and will become responsibility of City of Renton if the area were annexed. However, considering very few commercia/properties in East Highlands,provision of these services would have a minimal impact on Renton's Fire expenditures and may be absorbed within the current budget and level of sta�ng. 3 This amount is 20%of estimated total amount collected for business license fees, as 80%is dedicated to road maintenance(capital projects). 4 The City of Renton will lose the contract payment from Fire District 25, calculated as$1.25 per thousand of assessed valuation. �.A t._ R�". �� `�'. ,'j ,� �, �..�d �..., � ". . �„ �`� 1 1�2�2�05 Map Output Page 1 of 2 . ��j King County � � � • = � iMAP - Kin Coun Lev Rates and Districts ,��;�4342 � �`�6986� 1�69.86�� .�.* ;f � � �;;2�14�`� � �� 6997� �-_. _�-��- � 6997 � f { t - ��:r$ Jf" 'w f k ��J M � ! . � ! A_ ' •��' . � ��3�� " ��: �21.04 2146� , , � • �l � �._ �„"") �w�`'��s�� ;- ` ' . ,,<a � �,�r� �,.., � � i'� � ` . �,. �� '* �� _`� �� 2�� ,__:,r'�- ` � � � .� t.3�>� �s 1 E �"r, ; �� , -,.-� � __� ��.�.� �, �'� � � "�� ,*`,�'�� I �a,smis @��:: �i Ii_- L U4 y � ',.y -.i i� � � � " `,."r 3�k.�� , ' �`��B ,. � ��4� !�1---- � '�sii�i�+�.�iwcw�+i..�z.-..- Cl�� .i - ' ��' , '6867. -, , . .. _�� ,�,.�� ; ...2146�� - ��r-� - �' 21-04.. : 2163 I" _ 6867 �i � � " i�, � � �� 41�� 2147 - -�. _ _.. ..,_ � � -- . ..__ '-� r - �-�-- r � 2100 � � � j 2�147 � ; �84�� .. - .� �. 210.4 � , � . � .' , �' ` �1 6870 6867 ' � ��- �-=-=4�3�2 �� 4350 �r r, _ 214`.� � � . � / i:. "' 'i V - �]� _, � `—L114� � «-. � - . .. ' , �+ p , — - '— �-- � -:'U$�Q�� ; ., ~` yy}� y/}� ., 686� 6861 68�0 ': '�'.1 ,A �•\ a� ' �i iRa�i4_1+ V�V� �^ , . .. � ,{x 4 �f�� Ip ♦ �� 2�� ..:��a��3�� ---� 211�0 r: - .. �6880 , , . �' ' 487�8'6.�30.... ,�' '� - .r � � '� 48�2.}:(.�:_.� � �.� ' r , � 4398 � 4�399 - — 4865�� .,4g6p� ' �.� �r----,�- .21�27 ,,�,. ��'f�7 4+1�� r� �..r.- � � —��, .��h��,-----J�--_ , �� -- �—.—... . . . 42�0 ' ��50�'�� + ' �`�.�,``�� 160- � i 4880 l� 4170�i �0� � �»�,�. �:_��,Y i--�' , � ,> �� , �.;� � � ��:�� http://www5.metrokc.gov/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=overview&ClientVersion=4.0&Form=True&Encode=... 03/13/2006 Map Output Page 2 of 2 Legend �/' Selacted Features City Distn€:i 2�105 � t3 ��r3aaa 1=� C�unty Bound'ary , Parc.�ts In�rporat�d krea Streets KGA Lovy Rate Labeis ,�,r,,,s, KCA Levy Rates AtYs�az ? 79�J33 t`r._. J ft`titJ�`j -�� Lakesand Large Rrvc�rs J `a yj3a:1 , 5tream5 to ��:i3i3i3 �f Fire Di�trid 2005 i� ti�v� f/ School Distrr:;t 2405 �= �='a!<+�� he information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King County makes no representations or warranties,express or implied,as to accuracy,completeness,timeliness,or rights to the use of such information.King County shall not be liable for any general,special,indirect,incidental,or consequential damages including,but not limited to, ost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the information contained on this map.Any sale of this map or information on his ma is rohibited exce t b written ermission of Kin Coun . King County�GIS Center�News�Services�Comments(Search By visiting this and other King County web pages,you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site.The details. http://www5.metrokc.gov/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=overview&ClientVersion=4.0&Form=True&Encode=... 03/13/2006 � �� 900 � � , , ,;; 2� � -. � � e n t n � �� .�. � ._ _._. � �� -,, _ � � � � _ ; _.' � , - { Ct�C' I� / ' ' n �, r � O� �V.7 , `� �9� � � �� V� ,�i ♦ , - ,�. �_ - . -F� �% _ ' � `: .' -� �� f'. �. ._� . ��'1t � � . , �.� '_.�t i. '�* ,. , . A �I �_ - M � � y . �> , , � . . . , _ ... �. � `` • � / ` � � i I � p- 4 � Y� i � . - . 40�� ,� � _ __ i,� , _---____ __ _, � , , �, � � � � ' � Lake ��'��c � ; ; - � ; . o � i � ' c� . � _ 167 ' ' �- � � - . Lcrke Yoi�n�,r.s � . ,,__ . , �.� � � . � �� , �� ° �. _ ... � ��l NT � � - r � � � �-� � ; � 3� � �� Kent - � - t r j � 9 � 4�1 � � I � I r �nto . �_ , � �ry� � � Q � � � � � �a 'e V .. a�je y� , �; . � y�'.!� .� ,i� . . � _�..A► _� �... .__ •.� ,.� ..�, � - � .�„�"r"``�...,�r � � �F �� n Ma le Valle Rd '� �_� p Y o,� ��y �0s S� �` '� _ -�� -� � � ~,.�� ,a.r ._ _ \ _ � � <-._.�- _ S�.p----�.� L�� etro��ts � ky R , r— Legend {� Shelter Sites - Fault Lines County Road Lifeline • WastewaterTreatment Plants Railroads ---------- County Boundary ■ Pump Station Water Pipelines Water Features � Regulator Station Olympic Pipeline - Landslide Hazards � Bridges Sewer Lines - Seismic Hazards �� Priority Bridges Freeway � Roads Maintenance Facility Primary Transfer Station or Landfill Collector Minor N 4 2 0 4 Miles September, 2005 Map Output Page 1 of 1 �;�; King County � � � . � iMAP - Sensitive Areas all themes �'�-. °, r ��, .� - i �. _ � �E,3,i6T.1i 5T _� , 1 ..., w , � � 4 ,_ US N��,.7.. . � � , � � � sal t � `� f . f�t cr'� Sff�138THrPL� � > : > w � , a � � J � �-�.' x E 13 TFi Pt�E--�`'-'`—_ .. �_ � r,.' �-- ' r, �` 3 r F- r'—.,._> ' ;� � Mf V . �. :. . ... ¢�--. a,- .,-x� r...-� a so � o}----Q ti. " .,. . r,,",-t.t .,r�� __.,.C'.r. �r- � � �,�}�" _� ��'IY?��Ys � CS � /ry ` � 7s`J �� SE 141h' ' ` Z - ! �*� �-t� 4o- ,s .c� �'"_;� � .:� �- � s�a � : � ��}�5�� r �`=3�C ��. �_ S� �'2cr,'r� -E.�!��`�r ��-�; _. '�-,�� -- � ��14dTN ST ' � z� � � , �'ti�I' �� ''� a � : '' Y;�.,��, � a; SE : �� f �19�iT►+ I K:a�.` j� _ I\ �� ._k� �`�`�;� � ^'-n- � �,r '�� f ` � ` �, �'�` ~��rJ�; `� ��`��. y �'� `-� � '� ~ " �' .F � � ti` � . . � . 1� '7w"_- �i � `../ ' Y['�� .� y 1 � - •'.. s�a s �-. / ir . _ e` �� ,�,�N T . ' � w"�' ♦`'�'t�'n..�-,. � �.�•�� ` �ir+SiY' . �`� •� �-t C'iPx�ty. 1"` ��.�. 'da e � . �� "'�,\ti \\ ., � �' �*`�y �°� _ `� ��; ±;� � �`' ,� . '-• ,�r . -, ` �' �� .`�,�, � ��:.- , �� .; �, ' . � _ :�. ��; ,_;.` �. _ �;��.4.3.,1.: � ,......�.�- � -- � ��,: � � :��., ^=�` ��-� � � J � I � -fdt��`�t � � . � . '. ��`s� -�}(�.��;, T�/'�� 1 � � i x�'`;.,'��'�'��jT""{ Lt [',�` l��/- ai ; ,��- j � f� � �F � f.. , � .: -� �rCt2003KmgCounty . -1 �.52r�i Legend � i= �.:c�unly Boun.iary � Lakas ar�d L��ge R:�,�rs �:,;:,.,� Streets • % Streams .�q,,,a, � Fbodway A+�'^a% ;:�� SAO Servmr_'. -� Landslvje Hazar•.i C�raina��Ar�a Par_.ek - ��:y.. �,.re' he information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. ing County makes no representations or warranties,express or implied,as to accuracy,completeness,timeliness,or rights to the use of such nformation.King County shall not be liable for any general,special,indirect,incidental,or consequential damages including,but not limited to, ost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the information contained on this map.Any sale of this map or information on his ma is rohibited exce t b written ermission of Kin Count . K rg Ca�niy�G1S Center� News� Serv�ces�Comments�Search By visiting this and other King County web pages,you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site.The details,_ http://www5.metrokc.gov/servleticom.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?S erviceName=overview&C 1... 04/08/2005 Map Output Page 1 of 1 �,� King County � � � . -� � iMAP - Sensitive Areas all themes _ . '�; _ - � ; %�' � };5. � . . . . . , , _ 4 .. , . � ,.: � , ,� �� +� �: '�* ��,� �� o .� > - r , ;, ._ _- : , ' 4 , � � '� ,no �,i,�' .� n�"' � = . r� fi- �r 5'�'�� , - . , . � ,: � ?�. : . 4 _. ' .,. . f, �. �"__ ; ., `�� i . . `� ,� .� _ .... . 'Y��`- _. . - __ L� '��• � Lake Kathleen �� ~ �� , , -� _ , ,�, �. ' � ��" �` ` � -��'. 't -� �-�=-�` � -_�,� �:. ; -, � . . �:;� �,,'K��f � � �,, , . ' �,, �' , � <�'� �� r fff '��,�I� � , `M�� '�^ > z . . . .� �' , , � � :t �� r L�e MtDo:. �` . � - �-, ~ +' �� /r , � =;'?�f '�'j r �t 'i � '� �' _ f � � 4 1.. ' , ' , � � ' _ /' ' ' / � `�1 � ' • .% . !m�'kt,y �-pti ' : . �+ v� / �. . �y,. i, , -.. , _, . f� /r�''''�// • . � ,t .. . ., � f..,f�."' ♦ t -r� ��'�f `/��/�l � �`Y��.�,`�A �. _.. "`^�. � ��.-��`' , `"� �v.� Y �",>�^�,��`�f�,,.� fj .f . , . . �f ��— o L„�''�- ' . '��y/�� . .� �, ' .. ,av�. .-�L i �, f/,o� ��.�.J'��,'i�;•�,if�l'j/�f /,;,•'/ T.'�eda'r River_ �,� /T �, % '�y''Y,��+, - !r,�!` ' ;,�„�f�i ,�/', /r t,"%//l.� ��4 f.ft" ��` ��'� J �J �/� � � •"x�� L'� , � , � � . . i '��/�...��'► �Y,� ��r-' � ,5 .,��'� t . , , �., .� +e.,�,� � .-:� y.'�� .. . � �, �'J7�++ � �� /� .. � 3�� ,� �� ' '�{1 `�` �, .�. �"� �i�� ''i � i.� •.t. ' � � � �� / �.�� ..I:r '�W�: . � .. j/�� .."1, ,�,,� i � . k .� • � ,a ,� `. f; , L �� y� , , � �. `e y"tM'�'?'�-��r^i'��, jf+� • . 1 � �� Y . .v-�.rz' 'Y �'��M .5 .z;�+f� . i ,�*,'�� r� � '�s ,L . � :� ,��i' i c � a 4 ,�y� '.,"��---- ,. , s .. �, ��• � ' `` Lake Desire �'��.,..�•/, ' . ,. � r,f'� . I ;C�2002 Kmg County � � � � � �• , _ •� 1.��5mi � � /:• Le�end Streels Sir�arm �i.v:,d .�;,�,,.� � 100 Year Fbodplain +��_ � 5A0 Welland � � SAQ Lands{�:ie Pa«� 5Afl Erosion Intarporated Area Landslr�e Na�ard Draina��e Ar�a I-1 Lakes and Large Rivers _ L—� .;•a wx cv'r,', he information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. ing County makes no representations or warranties,express or implied,as to accuracy,completeness,timeliness,or rights to the use of such nformation.King County shall not be liable for any general,special,indirect,incidental,or consequential damages including,but not limited to, ost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the information contained on this map.Any sale of this map or information on his ma is rohibited exce t b written ermission of Kin Count . K�ng Counry�GIS Center(News� Services�Comments�Search By visiting this and other King County web pages,you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site.The d_etails. http://www5.metrokc.gov/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=overview&Cl... 04/08/2005 { � Annexation Review Form [X ] 10% Notice of Intent [ ) 60% Annexation Petition TO : Finance Surface Water Utility Fire Water Utility Parks Wastewater Utility Police Transportation Public Works Maintenance Current Planning FROM : Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning (contact Don Erickson, x6581) SUBJECT . Preserve Our Plateau Annexation Background/Location: Proponents for the annexation of much of the East Renton Plateau PAA have now submitted a 10% Notice of Intent petition to the City Council requesting that it authorize anannexation election for the 1,474 acre area. Basically,�the annexation site is everything east of 156�'Avenue SE and south of SE 128�' Street that is within our PAA as well as the Maplewood Elementary School site, the King County parklands south of SE 136th Street, and some additional properties north and south of the recent Maplewood East Annexation that recently came into the City. Areas not included include Maplewood �I-leights Addition, Lamans Place Subdiv�sion, Briar Hill and Briar Ridge Subdivisions, Ridge Point Estates Subdivision (see attached map). Date Circulated: November.23 2005 Comments Due: December 1. 2005 General Information Area : ± 1,476 acres Street length : To be determined Assessed Value : $17,875,000 (current); $25,750,000 (full develop) Estimated Population : ±6,500 (estimated) Current Uses Residential : ±2,300 single-family detached dwellings Commercial : Industrial : . Public : � Comp Plan Designation : 100% Res. Low Density Future Uses: : Single-family detached housing Future Po ulation � + 9,100 estimate based on + 960 new units . � Reviewing Department/Division: _ 1. Does this expanded annexation area tepresent any unique or significant additional problems for your department/division? � � ��.�' �� (Over) �� 2. Are you aware of any problems or deficiencies in existing infrastructure or service provision to the enlarged area? ��u _ ,� . ��r� �i✓1�4�� ` p 'v'��`�`�° G�li�l�.-- /- 3. Does this proposed expanded annexation represent a logical extension of services provided by your department/division? 4. What additional facilities or staff would be required to serve this enlarged area? Can you identify any other co ts the City woul incur as a r sult of this annexation? /�f,�,� �bo�r�a✓��ii� 7'�s,i� C��Iucf'rOs�lS - �CtM � s��i!�. O/��o�Y7s��': .3'��'� �% 'r .�C-- a-G�-�i�ir.l .o�/ �b-ti fu.tolt.�.. . 5. Would the City assume ownership or responsibility for facilities currently owned or managed by another jurisdiction? Would new agreements or franchises be required as a result of this annexation? �,,�i'or,� � -��,�w �C�h C'i, a�� , /J �� f� � G . 6. Would alternate boundaries create a more logical annexation for provision of City services? (If yes, please indicate on the attached map.) �'j�i�■ General recommendation and comments: . �mir�t�r�y� �'/�...� • signature: �,C'��`I }�ate: 1 • — _�� Z �' DS Annexation Review Form [X ] 10% Notice of Intent [ ] 60% Annexation Petition TO : Finance Surface Water Utility Fire Water Utility Parks Wastewater Utility Police Transportation Public Works Maintenance Current Planning FROM : Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning (contact Don Erickson, x6581) SUBJECT . Preserve Our Plateau Annexation Background/Location: Proponents for the annexation of much of the East Renton Plateau PAA have now submitted a 10% Notice of Intent petition to the City Council requesting that it authorize anannexation election for the 1,474 acre area. Basically,�the annexation site is everything east of 156"'Avenue SE and south of SE 128�' Street that is within our PAA as well as the Maplewood Elementary School site, the King County parklands south of SE 136�' Street, and some additional properties north and south of the recent Maplewood East Annexation that recently came into the City. Areas not included include Maplewood �I-leigh'ts Addition, Lamans Place Subdivi'sion, Briar Hill and Briar Ridge Subdivisions, Ridge Point Estates Subdivision (see attached map). . . Date Circulated: November�23' 2005 Comments Due: December 1. 2005 General Information Area : ± 1,476 acres Street length : To be determined Assessed Value : $17,875,000 (current); $25,750,000 (full develop) Estimated Population : ±6,500 (estimated) Current Uses Residential : ±2,300 single-family detached dwellings Commercial : Industrial : : Public : � Comp Plan Designation : 100% Res. Low Density Future Uses: : Single-family detached housing Future Po ulation � + 9,100 estimate based on + 960 new units Reviewing DepartmenUDivision: �=1� � �,t'�i �, �� b;��;�� 1. Does this expanded annexation area r,epresent any unique or significant additional problems for your department/division? � �l b t lR r,�ci �t Q� V�w` c'��.Jr,.�� G. t Z.U/!� .1 ..i�' �,1� 3�P�-� ;n a t[D.�.�� (`2,3U� �I 1�bC�C?� , �fp��c,�� Sur�Ce l.�<�2.t— c:t- :rS� t,J�.;�c�. t,Jc'. , ��\ � ` ` ,, I! `� "t (��(;�J�P�'y'' " ",�� l �1 J•'�.� .C C r t" f (OVeI) 2. Are you aware of any problems or deficiencies in existing infrastructure or service provision to the enlarged area? ��C.P�.I � � tlE'e� L� �Uipr �C' 1�J��. 3. Does this proposed expanded annexation represent a logical extension of services provided by your department/division? r�� 4. What additional facilities or staff would be required to serve this enlarged area? Can you identify any other costs the City would incur as a result of this annex`ation? l�2 !�e-�� 'o a�ca .1'�ss c.,�orl� lc�e� ,�,e ��; ��.i-� ��1;,.� �� So.M-e � D'+�T�_ C��.+vl.��c��V� E'TtFc� C� �+1�1�Qy-��'v,-S� 5. Would the City assume ownership or responsibility for facilities currently owned or managed by another jurisdiction? Would new agreements or franchises be required as a result of this annexation? �('c,�,S.a.b-� a� so�,� �cs� �,cco�.,,��5 ,e�L 6. Would alternate boundaries create a more logical annexation for provision of City services? (If yes, please indicate on the attached map.) ��o General recommendation and comments: Signature: � ^ Date: 1�I 'Z�i I b S � . ;; _ CITY OF RENTON ,� � Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Alex Pietsch,Administrator November 23,2005 Gary and Maureen Weisser 12236 155r''Avenue SE Renton,WA 98059 SUBJECT: SAVE OUR PLATEAU ANNEXATION Dear Mr. and Mrs.Weisser, Anita Oliphant recently notified us that in circulating the 10%petition for the above referenced annexation you expressed interest in having the White Fence Ranch subdivision included. Unfortunately, it is not part of that annexation but could come in as a separate annexation. I am inclosing materials related to the annexation process for you. If you were interested in bringing your area into the City you would start with a 10%Notice of Intention to Commence Annexation Proceedings petition to the City Council. Basically, such a petition would have the signatures of property owners representing 10%of the area's assessed value. If Council supported the annexation they would authorize the circulation of a 60%Direct Petition to Annex which would require gathering signatures representing 60%of the area's assessed valuation in order to pass. If you think this is something in which a majority of the property owners could get behind you might want to pursue sooner rather than later. I say this because whereas there currently is no fee for processing annexations,beginning next year in January,the City will start charging a$2,500 processing fee. If you want to pursue this I will be happy to meet with you and get the necessary petition forms and exhibits ready for you. I can be reached at 425-430-6581 if you have questions. Sincerely, ✓ Donald K. Erickson,AICP Enclosure cc: Rebecca Lind �v��! R E N T O N 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE ti`� O� PLANNINGBUILDING/ � t% � , PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT � �'.�N�O� M E M O R A N D U M DATE: December 2, 2005 TO: Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator FROM: Sandra Meye , arlsportation Director STAFF CONTACT: Nick Afzali, Planning and Programming Manager SUBJECT: Preserve Our Plateau Annexation Transportation Systems staff has reviewed the subject proposed annexation in the East Renton plateau area, and have the fQllowing comments. ➢ Existing streets throughout the annexation area do not have roadway widths and pavement thickness that meet City of Renton standards. Also curb, gutter, and sidewalk are virtually non-existent--what does exist is very limited and at sporadic locations. Street lighting is non-existent, except at a few locations. What does exist does not meet City of Renton standards. At this time, we anticipate that upgrading streets to meet City of Renton standards will be the responsibility of existing property owners and/or new development. Upgrading of streets may also involve dedication of right-of-way. ➢ The City would assume ownership or responsibility for all streets, and the existing and new traffic signals on NE 4�' Street, within the annexation area. The Transportation Operations Section would assume responsibility for existing and new traffic signals,pavement markings, traffic control and street name signage, and street lighting. Since the annexation will encompass such a large area, additional staff may be necessary for maintenance of existing and new traffic control signage and pavement markings, as well as responding to future traffic control requests from residents. ➢ The City will incur energy costs (unknown at this time) associated with existing and future street lighting. Because of size of the proposed annexation, this issue (which has been raised in the past) should be addressed again. Costs associated with maintenance of existing and new traffic signals, pavement markings, and traffic control and street name signage may also need to be considered. ➢ King County has identified several road improvement projects (Draft 2004 Transportation Needs Report) in the proposed annexation area, totaling $4,835,000. These projects vary from the widening of 154`h Place SE/SE 142nd Place between Jones Road and 156`t' Avenue SE to safety and intersection h:\division.s\transpor.tat\planning�rlm�reviews�2005\east renton plateau annexation.doc Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator Page 2 of 2 December 2,2005 improvements on NE 4th (SE 128`h) Street, shoulder paving on several streets, a ped crosswalk light, and guardrail installation at one location. ➢ With annexation,we anticipate extension of the improvements on NE 4`�' Street in the adopted NE 3`d/NE 4�' Corridor Improvement Plan, including a new traffic signal at the NE 4`�'/160�'Avenue SE intersection and upgrading the existing signals at the NE 4�'/156�'Avenue SE,NE 4th/164�'Avenue SE, and NE 4`�'/168tn Avenue SE intersections. Cost of these improvements has not been determined. ➢ The Proposed annexation area lacks sufficient north/south and east/west streets to provide neighborhood connectivity/circulation and-reduce such traffic on NE 4cn Street and other existing high-volume streets. ➢ Existing residential develo�ment, schools and park land limit the opportunities for neighborhood connectivity/circulation improvements. However, previous review of transportation issues regarding this annexation�.(initiated as a result of discussions with Development Services and EDNSP staffl has identified several streets that could potentially improve neighborhood circulation. These include the north/south streets of 156`h Avenue SE between NE 4th and SE 142°d Place (widen to 5 lanes), and 160`h Avenue SE, 162"d Avenue SE, and the 168th Avenue SE/169 Avenue SE corridor, all three between NE 4�h Street and SE 144`h Street. East/west streets include SE 132°d Street and the SE 134�'/SE 136th Street corridor for the full length within the annexation area. Further study may identify additional streets of three or four block length as candidates for improving neighborhood access. At this time, upgrading of existing portion and new sections of the foregoing streets is anticipated to occur with new development. ➢ Additional improvements previously identified to improve neighborhood circulation include a new traffic signal at the 156`t'Avenue SE/SE 136`f' Street intersection and improvements at the 142"d Place SE/156�'Avenue SE intersection. The scope and cost of these improvements have not been determined. Cc: Karl Hamilton,Transportation Operations Manager Bob Mahn,Planning&Programming Engineer Nathan Jones,Transportation Planner Keith Woolley File cc: H:Trans/Planning/RI.,M/Revies/2005/East Renton Plateau Mnexation , EAST RENTON PLATEAU SURVEY RESULTS BACKGROUND In October and November of 2005, King Counry and the Four Creeks Unincorporated Area Council hosted three public meetings in the East Renton Plateau area, which falls in the City of Renton's Potential Annexation Area.The purpose of the meetings was threefold: 1. To provide information about annexation: what might change in the community if annexed to the City of Renton?What would remain the same? 2. To gather information about residents' concerns and issues related to annexation; and 3. To provide a forum for discussion of these issues among neighbors on the East Plateau. To garner further feedback regarding resident opinions related to annexation, and to collect opinions from those unable to attend meetings, an informal survey was developed. This report contains the results of those surveys. SURVEY METHODOLOGY/APPROACH The survey was mailed out to all residents of the East Renton Plateau (4,392 copies mailed), and was also available at all three communiry meetings.The survey questions were as follows: 1.What local government services are most important to you? (Rank if you choose — 1 means most important.) • Sidewalks/Streets/Roads • Neighborhood Programs • Design/Zoning Standards • Fire and Emergency Medical Services • How development is happening • Schools • Permitting • Library • Police • Water and Sewer • Parks/Recreation • Other • Economic Development 2.The Plateau has been experiencing a lot of development.What do you think about that? 3. Name your top 3 concerns about annexation. 4. If 1 had to choose today, I would: • Stay Unincorporated • Annex to Renton East Renton Plateau Survey Summary November 29, 2005 Prepared by Berk&Associates � . . _ _ - _ _ � » SURVEY RESULTS Caveats Statistical Significance. A total of 1 18 surveys were completed and turned in. The return rate on mailed surveys was 2.6%. Of the estimated 200 people attending the community meetings, only 18 completed surveys. As a result, the survey results are not statistically valid. The conclusions drawn from the surveys may or may not a�proximate results that would result from a broader, statistically valid sam�le of residents. Survey Bias. The large majoriry of survey responses (84%) came from mail or e-mail. Many of those respondents may not have attended one of the community meetings at which annexation-related information was provided. Question 1: What Local Services Are Most Important to Community Members? In Exhibit 1 below, the orange bars represent the number of people who identified that category as "important," either by ranking it with a number or marking it with a check or "X". The short blue horizontal lines represent the level of importance given to each category (lower numbers represent greater importance). Each blue line is the average ranking given by respondents who used numbers to rank levels of importance for that category. For instance, "Police" received 56 responses, and those responses had an average ranking of 2.7, indicating a relatively high ranking of importance. Exhibit 1 Importance of Government Services to Community Members �o ___ __ _ __ __ ___. a.o �.o 60 � 6.7 7.0 c � c � 6.1 tR a a E 5p � 6.o E y 5.5 N � O �Z � 5.2 � d N N d � q w S.0 � 40 ep 4.5 e 4.2 r � � v � � C d ;� 3J 4.0 � e � E 0 M 5.1 p C d 2O 2.7 � 3.O y a 2.5 � d � E 2.1 � d Z � 10 2.0 a p 1.0 FireB How Pdice Design/Zoning Schools WatttaSewer Sidewalks/ Library Parts/ Pmnitting Economk Neighbahood Emergmry Devdopment is Stardards Sheett/Roads Reueation Development Programs Medkal Happening Sevkes Source:Berk&Associates,2005 East Renton Plateau Survey Summary November 29, 2005 Prepared by Berk&Associates As the graph shows, there are four services that are noted frequently and given high importance by community members. Those four services, and their relative rankings are: (1) fire service; (2) development; (3) police service, and (4) design/zoning standards. Question 2: The Plateau has been experiencing a lot of development. What do you think about that? In nearly-unanimous fashion, community members dislike the recent development in the East Renton Plateau. Some blame King County, some blame the City of Renton, and some blame the developers, but nearly all respondents cite recent developments as unattractive. They use adjectives like "ugly," "boxy," "over-dense," and "poorly-planned" to describe the development, which they see as the antithesis of the lifestyle they sought when buying homes on the East Renton Plateau. Question 3: What Are Community Members' Top Concerns About Annexation? The areas of concern listed below represent opportunities for King County, the City of Renton, and the Unincorporated Area Council to provide more information and education. Sewers. Respondents in general expressed a desire to maintain their current septic systems. They are concerned that under annexation, Renton will force them onto Renton's sewer system, increasing their costs with no appreciable change in service. Taxes. Respondents expressed concerns that their tax burden would increase under annexation to Renton. Specific taxes mentioned included property taxes and utility taxes. Dense Development. Significant concern was expressed that Renton would allow more dense development in the East Renton Plateau, which would lead to increased traffic, increased noise, and a loss of the rural lifestyle that many community members consider essential. Again, these results suggest an educational opportunity. For example, the information provided at the community meetings set forth that sewer and septic regulations are not changed by annexation. Tax and fee data presented at the meetings showed that for over 99% of the tax parcels in the area, the combined tax and fee burden for the average household would drop slightly if the area annexed today. There were also extensive materials presented on the similarities and differences in city and county zoning and development codes, confirming that development on the East Renton plateau will continue under either scenario, but with regulatory differences. East Renton Plateau Survey Summary November 29, 2005 Prepared by Berk&Associates Question 4: If Community Members Had to Choose Today, Would They Stay Unincorporated or Annex to Renton? Exhibit 2 below shows that the majority of community members responding (74%) currently would choose to stay unincorporated. Of the community members responding to the survey who did attend one of the community meetings (a sample size of only 18), 44%, favor remaining unincorporated, with 28% still undecided. Exhibit 2 Stay Unincorporated or Annex to Renton? Responses from Mail/E-Mail Meeting Comment Responses Forms Total # Mo of Total # a/o of Total # %of Total Annex to Renton 15 16% 5 28% 20 18% Stay Unincorporated 75 80% 8 44% 83 74% No Response 4 4% 5 28% 9 8% TOTAL 94 18 112 Source:Berk&Associates,2005 East Renton Plateau Survey Summary November 29, 2005 Prepared by Berk&Associates PRESERV�t�Ui�Pi.ATEAU ANI�EXAT�ON F`�S�CAL AJVAI.YSIS SHEET Units Pc� ul�tiort AV Existin dev. 1,630 4075 $505,000,000 Full dev. 2,494 6235 $937,000,000 Assumptions: 2.2 persons/household $309,816 AV/existing unit $550,000 AV/new SF home Revenues ' :::; Total revenues ExiStin Fu[! ��t� Existing :::��:;�6�;�5��:fiQ: Re ularlev $1,589,957 $2,950,079 3.14843 Full;:::::$4;1;47;7'S7;7$ Excess le $39,698 $73,658 0.07861 State shared revenues R�fe er ca Ex�stin �ull Li uor tax $3.93 $16,014.75 $24,503.55 Li uor Board rofits $7.41 $30,195.75 $46,201.35 Gas tax- unrestricted $23.69 $96,536.75 $147,707.15 MVET $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Cam er excise $0.75 $3,056.25 $4,676.25 Criminal 'ustice $0.22 $896.50 $1,371.70 Total $146,700.00 $224,460.00 Miscellaneous revenues Rate Ex�stin �ull Real estate excise" $48.57 $197,922.75 $302,833.95 Utilit tax** $133.20 $217,116.00 $332,200.80 Surface Water Utilit Fee $105,428.00 $155,227.00 Fines &forfeits* $17.53 $71,434.75 $109,299.55 Total $591,901.50 $899,561.30 * Per capita ** Per housing unit- based on $2,220 annual utility billing @ 6% tax rate .............. �a�sts:;;;:;:':'::::::`: Tot�l can�aing cc�sts Per c.� ita �xi�tin Fttlt Existing::: ��;��`f�;�91:s82: Contracted Services Full::::::$�;21�;23�:9�' Public Defender $4.68 $19,071.00 $29,179.80 Jail $8.56 $34,882.00 $53,371.60 Subtotal $53,953.00 $82,551.40 Court/le al/admin. $66.92 $272,699.00 $417,246.20 Parks maintenance" $14.90 $79,369.32 $132,282.20 Police $276.89 $1,128,326.75 $1,726,409.15 Surface Water***" N/A $351,050.00 $398,720.00 Road maintenance*" N/A $159,843.75 $285,781.00 Fire**" $1.25 $631,250.00 $1,171,250.00 Total $2,676,491.82 $4,214,239.95 *See Sheet Parks FIA *"'See Sheet Roads FIA *** Rate per$1,000 of assessed valuation (FD#25 contract) �1�tf��aaC impa�# .. """*Annual o eration &maintenance cost of$238 er acre Existin �3Q8;235;`12 P p 9::::::::::::.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:... Full ; :::::::�$f��;r�82:'I:� (�liie�tii`iiP:�ci��Parks acquisition &development(from Sheet Parks FIA): $2,087,132.00 Parks Development Only $1,270,448.00 Other one-time costs: Total one-time costs: :'::::$1;;�7(�;i#4�:�Q: Revised 02-02-06 � , CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL ��: Submitting Data: For Agenda of: Dept/Div/Board.. EDNSP/Strategic Planning October 23, 2006 Staff Contact...... Rebecca Lind (x6588) Consent.............. X Subject: Public Hearing.. East Renton Plateau PAA - Prezoning Correspondence.. Ordinance............. Resolution............ Old Business........ Exhibits: New Business....... Issue Paper Study Sessions...... Prezonin Ma Information......... Recommended Action: Approvals: Council concur by setting public hearings for Legal Dept......... November 6, 2006 and December 11, 2006 and refer Finance Dept...... this item to the Planning Commission for their Other............... deliberation and recommendation on November 1, 2006. Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment....... Amount Budgeted....... Revenue Generated......... Total Pro'ect Bud et N/A Ci Share Total Pro'ect.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: On November 15, 2005 the Council received a 10% Notice of Intent petition, to annex approximately 1,475-acres of unincorporated King Counry located within Renton's East Plateau Potential Annexation Area. The County certified the petition on December 19, 2005. On February 13, 2006, Council adopted a resolution calling for an election on the question of annexation to the City of Renton and requested that an election be held on February 6, 2007. Prezoning the East Plateau PAA establishes zoning prior to annexation and allows the City to adopt by ordinance its zoning decision. This process gives citizens, through the East Renton Plateau Advisor Committee, an opportunity to participate and creates certainty for voters In November 2004, the City amended its Comprehensive Plan changing most of the East Renton Plateau's land use designation from Residential Single Family to Residential Low Density. This change would support a range of zones including the RC, R-1, and R-4 zones. Under state law, the City is required to hold at least two public hearings 30-days apart on future zoning. Because of the size of this potential prezoning, the Administration is suggesting that Council forward it to the Planning Commission for an additional public workshop and recommendation. It is anticipated that the Commission would meet on November 1, 2006, in order to have its recommendation back to Council before it takes up this matter on November 6, 2006. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Set November 6,2006 and December 11, 2006, for public hearings to consider prezoning for Renton's East Renton Plateau PAA Rentonnet/agnbill/ bh r . ��y � ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, C� � � � NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC ' � ' PLANNING DEPARTMENT ��N�o� M E M O R A N D U M DATE: October 16, 2006 TO: Randy Corman, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: Kathy Keolker,Mayor FROM: Alex Pietsch, Administrator ��/t� STAFF CONTACT: Rebecca Lind(6588) SUBJECT: Prezoning East Renton Plateau Potential Annexation Area �P�) ISSiJE: • Whether the City Council wishes to prezone the remaining portions of the East Renton Plateau PAA before an election is held on the Preserve Our Plateau Annexation(POPA)? • If Council wishes to prezone this area, should areas having the Residential Low 'Density(RLD) land use designation be zoned a combination of R-4, four units per net acre, R-1, one unit per net acre, and Resource Conservation(RC), one unit per ten acres,based upon sensitive areas analysis,probability of sewer service in the foreseeable future, and existing development character, including size of lots? RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that Council: • Refer the issue of prezoning for the remaining unincorporated portions of the East Renton Plateau PAA to the Renton Planning Commission for a public workshop and recommendation on November 1, 2006. • Set November 6, 2006, and December 11, 2006, for public hearings to consider prezone zoning classifications for the remaining unincorporated portions of the East Renton Plateau PAA. h:\ednsp\paa�annexations\preserve our plateau\prezoning issue paperl0-13-06.doc � � Randy Corman,Council President Page 2 of 3 October 13,2006 BACKGROUND SLTMMARY: Prezoning is the process of establishing future zoning for unincorporated properties within a city's PAA,pursuant to RCW 35A.14.340. Prezoning will also help address much of the uncertainty about what the future entails with annexation. Use of prezoning speeds up the annexation process since the minimum two required public hearings on zoning, held at least 30-days apart, occur earlier in the process. In the case of the East Renton Plateau PAA, there is currently much uncertainty in the community as to what future zoning will be. In the 1,475 acre POPA area, the City has akeady taken a policy position lowering density for future development. In November 2004, Council amended its Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map, redesignating virtually all of the POPA area Residential Low Density(RLD) from Residential Single Family (RSF). From potential R-8 zoning, at 8 du/net acre, this action reduced the maximum density allowed under the RLD designation to 4 du/net acre. The RLD designation also allows R-1 and Resource Conservation(RC)zoning which could even lower maximum densities further if these were applied to critical areas. These other zones might be more appropriate for some of these areas. Prezoning the remainder of the East Renton Plateau PAA will clarify this situation. Prezoning will also allow for public input on the zoning issues prior to the annexation election. Under state law,two public hearings held at least 30-days apart are required when prezoning properties in a city's unincorporated PAA. Property owners are typically notified by mail,public notice postings, and newspaper ads announcing meeting times and location. Although Renton met with residents of the POPA area in 2002-2003, and this influenced staff recommendations to change the land use designation for this area from RSF to RLD, we have not heard from residents and property owners on recommendations for specific zoning designations in the area. The City has formed a Task Force of unincorporated area residents to review community planning issues, including zoning for this area. The Task Force will develop a prezoning recommendation on October 16, 2006, for the Planning Commission's consideration. This recommendation will evaluate mapping alternatives for RC,R-1, and R-4 prezoning. The Planning Commission will hold a briefing to hear the Task Force's recommendation on October 18, 2006, and is expected to hold a public workshop and make its recommendation on November l, 2006 prior to the Council's first public hearing on November 6, 2006, if Council concurs with staff's recommendations. CONCLUSION: Prezoning the remainder of the Renton's East Renton Plateau PAA before the POPA fall election on annexing approximately 1,475 acres of it into the City would appear to be in the public's best interest. First of all, it would give interested residents a better understanding of the City legislative process. Second,prezoning should reduce resident h:\ednsp\paa�ar►nexations\preserve our plateau\prezoning issue paperl0-13-06.doc i ^ Randy Corman,Council President Page 3 of 3 October 13,2006 and voter apprehension about future land use and zoning issues affecting the area, and third, it shows residents that the City is following through in reducing residential densities in the azea, as it indicated it would,back in 2004. h:\ednsp\paa�annexations\preserve ow plateau\prezoning issue paperl0-13-06.doc „ �. . Preserve Our Plateau Annexation Committee of the Whale Briefing September 11, 2Q46 ��b��,�� East Renton � � � Plateau PAA � `�� UGB �� ,p' 4e�5 �o� 3 �� „�� '�f < Size: 2,091 acres ;� �� ,�; �� , Estimated Pop: 7,287 K � .ro � �+�� fi Roads: 371inear miles Y� �� w�, � :� ;m �'�°�e��►.�s� Parks: 85.93 acres � '�S�142n�� ' � �a��.��thSt .�.�,..w...��„ � , � -- � u> �>, County Zoning Map 1 r � Proposed Annexation Area �. r �.., �... ; w�s� , �j: i „ �R �Q� `. . �..�_,NM F � '6 �_ p� ^s � x � .. ,,,. �. <.... �__ , s �,,,�yi�V -,_�., � �.,�"V�,a�`4'. � . .. - $ , V �� ,r�:,. � : . a �,..g . . � .. x..� � "F � }y. ..'Ef.� '....R�7h:v. i.'A'9 , .e a ; • . , •, i , r - �..,. ° ` � ��• ', '�.. ' -�u:>_= ..� , s._...� ., �_ _.. ..i , ;E g . " `, . .., , .� ":.ri:M��" ,,.,. °' ...... { d • _. <n.; ,� � � � . ' . .�. �s . ..., �. `re}ai,.. $: _.._ _,,..._:.... �,� �:-- s�,:` � .. �,.: e C��""'�„►' ¢ .' ,.%�:�,� y �: � ', , � � ' ,. , �r u.� :a�:.�,: ' . �, . _ q..,„e : t6 r .� r � ,. , . . . . ..Fi S' Q � ., .:°� .t S, v. ,t M�. „:� ..... ,,, , ' `�'w3' ; - $�, } r s � �,�.. a{. ��.y , . .«r' : ,. ,. ' � < :, , �;d,.K, tt:, � �"x::: ._'; z �,.. � :�x . :. - * ° = 9 .. �: '�S..a.,, �� .. ,,w,, ��'sai'«ib' pt R ^... . . `' ' ' �.. ...e & .��:�,.�,'., .�'V x�v»� ��° -�' � # " \COR # . a�.� � g " � :�,� . , �:,. � <.r�� _ . � , ...,��. ,� - .,a„ �� ,,. - , . „. , ,_-. ;r .. , °�., ��'' . � ' . --—., .",��'_.=� ._ `>' .. � , .� ,`�� .'�< �,� Proposed Preserve Our Plateau Annexation �m, 3:�� :��w f �`�`.. . �_,. �..�„�,... > �„��,�,�, b.. „ ' �^�.+•. ReiM9n CkY UMS i i�91t�!� INw�Giwrth 6cux�y Existing Condi�ions - POPA • PAA - Within Renton's PAA • Location— Generally area east of 156th Ave SE and south of SE 128�' St within Renton's East Flateau PAA, and a few properti.es west of 156�' Ave SE • Size - + 1,475 acres • Existin�Use - ± 1,630 single-family dwellings • Boundaries—2/3's of site is bordered by the Urban Growth Boundary 2 � �� ; Proposed Preserve Our Plateau Annexation ._.A�,,,�„a� � RMiGI MGp ^^"'°'Renlan C1ty l.hnb �;+w..« '' .s„k.nk....w....a —� UrEen Oraw�h BauiCary � Background • On February 13, 2006 Council adopted a resolution — accepting the 10%Notice of Intent petition, and — calling for an election, • Resolution did not put issue of future zoning on the ballot, allowing City to go through pre-zoning process • Resolution did not put issue of assumption of City's bonded indebtedness on ballot since amount is relatively small and expected to be rerired in 2Q09 3 POPA Implications • In order to ensure Renton's current level of service for the whole East Renton Plateau PAA, City anticipates hiring 22 additional new employees • At that level of staffing, Renton could anticipate an annual fiscal deficit of$263,000 ba�ed on existing conditions (without additional development) • Major efficiencies exist by bringing area in at one time that vvould not be realized with smaller piecemeal annexations Annexation Implications, continued — Efficiencies include staffing up now and becoming the service provider for this area — Controlling new development under Renton's zoning and development regulations rather than those of the County 4 Election Process • State law requires that Council notify County Auditor of its preferred election da�e within 3Q days of receipt of BRB's findings and decision • A spring election date seems most preferable because of necessary preparatory work • March 1, 2007 is a critical date in t�rms of establishing levy rates for the area that the City would begin collecting in 2008 • March 1, 2007 is also a critical date in terms of m�imizing County's $1.75 M East Renton Plateau Incentive Offer Election Process, continued • Possible Spring 200'7 Election Dates — February 6, 2007 — March 13, 2007 — April 24, 2007 — May 15, 2007 • All dates but February 6, 2007 miss March 15t deadline for implementing 2008 levy rates and receiving state shared revenues • Potential lost 2008 revenue in excess of$2.4 M 5 Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation - 2004 • In November 2004 Renton amended its Comp Plan Land Use Map changing the land use designation for this area from RS (max. 8 dulnet ac), to RLD (max. 4 dulnet ac) — Density on remaining 216 developable acres nearly halved — Number of vehicular trips potentiaily generated also halved Future Zoning • In passing its former resolution in February Council decided not to place the proposition of future zoning before the voters at this time — Because area has not yet been prezoned City believes it is premature to put zoning issue on ballot, — City prefers to hold two or more public hearings on prezoning when it will be able to present sub- axea recommendations consistent with the new RLD designation to residents and get their feedback 6 . . Information Issues • Will annexation timing affect the existin sg ewer moratorium? The existing sewer moratorium is scheduled ta expire in December,having been extended for another six months. If election not held until 2007 — Optians include extending the moxatorium for another few months,or — Letting it expire and continuing to issue permits based on Renton's Comp Plan RLD land use designation Without sewer moratorinm development occurring during interim would develop to County standards at Renton density Information Issues, eontinued • If this annexation bv election fails, what is likelv to happen to the area in the near term? � — As the designated sewer service provider for this area the City has already issued sewer eertificates for over 250 units in the area. — The existin�sewer moratorium will be expire and new certificates issued based upon the City's RLD Comp Plan land use designation, or 4 dulnet acre — Subsequent annexa#ions likely to be incremental and Iess than SO-acres in area — Until annexation occurs future development will continue under King County development regulations — Based upon County statements the existing level of service will continue to d�cline 7 Recommendation • The Administration recommends that Council — Adopt a resolution indicating February 6, 2007 as its preferred date for an election on the question of whether registered voters in the POPA favor or do not favor annexation to the City of Renton at this time, and — Direct the City Clerk to transmit this resolution, specifying Renton's preferred election date, to the County Auditor 8 East Renton Plateau PAA Planning Commission Briefing August 9, 2006 Background ♦ Beginning in 2002 City met with residents of East Renton Plateau interested in preserving its lower density suburban character ♦ King County zoning was allowing development equivalent to Renton's R-8 zoning at that time ♦ In 2003 City changed Comp Plan land use designation from RS to RLD, with maximum density of 5 du/ac ♦ In 2004, City amended Comp Plan land use designation for most of the East Renton Plateau from RS to RLD with the latter designation having a maximum density of 4.0 units per net acre Background, continued. ♦ With Comp Plan amendment from RS to RLD City began issuing Sewer Availability Certificates at a maximum density of 4.0 units per net acre ♦ Although reducing the density allowed under County development regulations, this action did not prevent smaller lot development allowed by the County ♦ In June 2005, City adopted a Sewer Moratorium for the unincorporated portion of the East Renton Plateau ♦ This moratorium was extended to December 6th, 2006 ` - � � , � ,� . . , . . . . . • . . . . . . . - . . . . � . . , . . � . -- . '�• � . ; � � � . � • � � � � � � I Background, continued ♦ East Renton Plateau PAA at a Glarice: — 2,091 acres — 7,287 residents (estimated) — 37 lineal miles of roads — 85.93 acres of undeveloped parks — $719,506,500 Assessed Value in 2005 • / � � � � � � • 1 .� ..-- L:. ' .. � �.. -. -' - _ - _„ ._ %`� �..�-: i'�::��3 �- i -..,� �,'�;;�� -_ �m--�-r _.,--�.i ; ... '... �' - - r ?��fl�� ' --��(�, f� I� -- f,�,-.� ,. ' �u � � _— N• � !�� t�- � j i i - � � � � ��T1�� J � � ;� � _� -�+ �-� _�- � � � j� r;� � _. �� — �! n IY.L�"..�i �__.�i..� �,��ijT.yl r � ' _ ��1 � ,� � - �� ,�— _� ,E-�F ; �T ��, , - 'f��- �- -- ��_� r � �t�i-.� � "'� � ,. : � --. �r � tt_ # +�r� r � � � � �:r � � =� , .. � :� �_.} ..� � �,-, .;,T�t.,.�� - i �- l } I �; .:� c Y` �t �. i i __ ^IO, � , ; } 1 ..-,.t „��. t,�iF i 1 S .� �"�'i,1 '3"„_ -y � -�,_ _ `_'1_— . � � t i ^ �� j . ��'�..t i j r �=rt i � � . � L�` 5�� `� ._ _ 1 , f .i'- I - ��((,�`�y�,'S�'�,��./'.� � � � .Y" J�Vf4 j {�$ �) . � .._ � l.r�..��fv��' � � L' :'1 .. 2- � �� l y j '� � '�y�� }f' 1 -1',' 1 i .� 4 q �/Y' -i. �7 7��Cy� li.l.f ';.0� �yrT^ r: ��^'r r r"'7"'��I�� n r,, k �;,, : �v,�� rri'�r}E-� � c � �u n .i..L � � 3_� �^ �V Jh. � *'u r7 � -4 .j,_j[r � V y/ �',� � � , � ^" 'I^j�� f�`� c. � , , .. . � �- � � , r� { '\ .e./.` l i _ f � it �� ' �� . ; � � � � i .. I� ) . .. i _—'_ . '_. ..1 � . ;==t �°" �}�i � I A � — _ �� -.� �� :- � �� u � ,- � _:' � i" � �, , I. , � ��, a — c��. i `� �� [ - �� a �s� i1 [ i � � , I � �� , y� � �.,, j �- � «�s �� L � � �� M�;� �„, � ��€� � -:� �� t � �- � �f � � i y �rr.�._ .;—,m( -�T °�E � �-�.�t ,:, 1� ��__' l ,� � rl .II. .^ b�ll'"'—� 4 �� i �14"1 .^J�J��'.. 1 f i��. . �y��, t�, i :. �T rL 1 �� . �� - "` 1'� � ;�y�� H3 � � '� a{R`} �� ;--�I ( . t � � Jh � � � �L= � ' ,� � � �� `� }��'' P> , k r.; � �'��-ri�`xrts. � � � � sE fi l�� I: �� l ,,- ...� �` r-�i . ' i = . � i i ; �. � J�;`'`; �'- „" N t r��,�"' � L-�� i I �1 , y f � � � F `"�, i�., _ '�^` ��`��t--,k� �k��'�� },� cw��m.d Fi�... t�„r,i' � ,��^`�� Q x L � x'� � )� k J��u } -- _ •na�r.a ��6`f� ..r.� �'� '" �� .;i� � .,. � �� _ ny y� '. - - /, � =�^F 4� � �\�IL . � ��\/� II � �� \"y`,-�\� T�.� � .� � �� I I. , � � I ! V1�I�' , � '�49'�H �Bcm 3$c�_Mc.Y�L {�_ � '� .. {;�i.0 ";�\ � . � - _ �''. . �.'t `i4�� . ' '. " '_ . ... _'. FIGURE3 1 .;:�:-_- .__ ._.... ....._. _ . . . .._ ._. �. East Renton Plateau __ G„��, ,.��`x' � o i�,�x� �'� — u�,c��,ma�ry I :192IX) �V Study Area ■■ Pa� � � } -� �o�A�� ix-�as��i.*��,nM�rn��i,xsm�ir��:Ni� „g � ao�a�nai�«�s�eu�oe�aa, �: �r r vn �� C�I k�,.a� _ He9iEenAalRu�eILeMUseOesi¢�aAm �v.� N. 1��. U ReSiCeMial$in9leFamilyLaMJseDevyneiron 4 / � f l� 1. -JCt �f ' I ', 'S t- � � �._..' F �a��1 I * � ` i n r �-_ - � '�e�,�_ 1-�.,�`.^�,� �c.T�� :- a�- :( � . � - i ��I 1 i� {� �� - ��'" ._ T { 3 � � _� a� � :�� —� f � � � �1 G � �� .��.] � � � .. � 'j__ . �'�f w� K�� ' �'i�� y� ..�f �_ ri� ,� } � ��`�=-�'�� l� C � � C e��:..I11��1J�' �� - 1 ; � �- � ,�-� i s �,�,�-_ �� - � ;� �-' ,-� t—-� _ yi' ` � r �. � (� , y_ �. -�' � ��--� rt�� _�i� �-� ��- ��I - t ��-r,� -� ' r ' �' �E � � f^� � � � ' �'�x� ��- -+��G � � � �� f� � '' � = � , '��,�� . �� 'f ��`L—S ��`� r�-� } -�, f �7� ��i ��> �_-� �� I I- _�L,� =�J> � �.�'�' a^ n�L�!'�� ` . ��;�1 � �\y •:.�j �^� t��. i� j,\`-, �`�� ..,�1��.�'_ `,� ,,,�.,;i ,r �,1.ii 1� i_,�r: . �� 1 `:� ��,� � - . 1 � � . v- � � �^'_-,�' }\'`^'�IJ�_�� -1.=�.� ., �1„a ��.�.� , F.;� ��.�a7 � � '�. � � / �li �—�' ., � r � a7�T ��" -r� ,� � i �f �;,�� ' z � �.f ��.i�`'. �'� tiy��"��/`� � i i .r� . _>;rr'�in" t \'�-.`�-`K` �7 . ^f . -„�✓ `� {J-�4T L f��:'1 ��, . � �`°-'t s' �1 � �.� -�` -_ � � - _ _ \ 1 w \ ��.s.'y �'��„ :��i �;_J� '�C�� ±�-" �/� , � � `� �A.�, i � .' � „ � . ... / �'"y,1, :,. , FIGURE 2 �::M_�_.. f •�.:`�'c -:� �_ ._' ._._�_ ..__ .. �� -. -SL'`�—- East Renton Plateau ° 15� 3�x' --- _�--� � __ —_______ _- ��ry�m�u � :�x� Parcel Sizes — �� : ,iw, �.��,.��.„ � ('Tl �ess rran to e90 sq a��ra ac�e� y' � k. i'Ik I� 1.NeiFhhnrhnoilx d Si-I eic Pinnn�ing �`..• N 1`na � ��u�,i � Leathen21780sV.A.I1;2acrC) � �(,lel 3p)1 � Grealer tlwn 41.790 sq.k.112 acreJ ) I , � � � � � � � , � � � � _ � � '•t�R.�;1�E. ` f ' � - . � � o- � t Kr � � 1(� fi� - � ��.., I� ��arn. , - _ __. 1—�—�J `, w I � = "i �' � � .�'YYL auw�u { .i� � '•� ' � z��a _ ! ! : w � � � � w^ .,t�ly : .�wRl Y i� p a a . � a . w Y,�,• � $ C� 9 E � � a ( �7 a " � � � 9�,' �� p g j � 3 - - <�.,. � � 3 1'�ML / i [�,�a „�� C:�...� i � i . — ' AKF } - 3 x � x + ••" ,� �y,� t 4� �.... \�.'s /�� t� w s 5 _ y 1 �� y E . � �� II . . 7 '�� I �J �� i_l�`��y�y �-L,�� tb�. � p - —r�� `�'�'�L �-�a a��' _ � �T.. � ��J 7�1 L F��fl1. ��`I`rl`�� ai�� y�,�� 5 L=� ��t.J I��. �1�.��c.'�h,��T�j�~�"� . �y L � '1�,, '' �'T�r--.r,� c-�z3c� � '�J '_' �.��fek. _I�h.'4��a �i�}-�� -�i��ayG��G.'RT, r� � a ' i� �� "��-�' `��`�?_�r.��,r��-'; �..-��—��.�+z; � ��'"_ ,m�v�---jl=�' �� f�l -'l^ q,�F�if:( 7��-�'-r"1-t��r r—. ��y � L -pf{- •�� k 'f�`�`}----I-- -�j�Y-�'� -1 �r--*�,,zz. �`t�� { -T�1 ��-. � ��-��'�r I � �-1-�n.*.�F?+ �►��I�e;� � �I F ,—L�4.'�L EXI_:•,�".._. ��}y��- �� ;�s�t�*r�h��ic.�� F' �f�-�-��I��'�1�� t'��2.� �"�1k'i`��.�'�`�� ' � 2� �c�c�,. fy �` 4�` -�,��(;.4i,.'�y�,i._ ��t�� u.'��,��E F L '?tr.'�6�7�L�,`�E§�+��1�!�j;�r ' �� `� �i.iY �y � �. F ��'' '�.��.��kfi� —�� '�-, ��`'—� � � ,��`��'��`�� ,'�': �t�'�� ,ti Y�"k.,t "'a��.� � z'�, � r,r. ��.��1`�-�.1,9,w : . ?i,'yr, ?4r;��:nt-��I'�1'��'�'� T,��C ' � ' � r,;�i.r ��i„y'ly1� '.._� � ' .--� ... .��1111_'._ � "` -. ; _ _ :.. . ., East Renton Plateau Land Use Designations ,.�KY a'� =:caomic Det�r2o:menL`:.i�hbor600ds S:Ra:egz:�la�aice � _'�i�� 0C)� r � �?x�r.s:�.a�>7.^c: � �i �,:,z Rosc.a � S 7dr-,:Mi � Rrsidenta Low 7ens;y � Rd�•vray 1 . �-,��00 0 Res�tlertna 3..^.ge Far+Hly 0 Renton G+.ry Limts — ' � � � � , ♦ • � , � � � � � � : � �� ,_ , � ..r� � �.�T ;I � . , ! .. � � �I �_ �— � � � 4'= � i' ;� -� � � ; ` '�. �F:.. ..� ?� � � I ..' ��. _ �-- � , � � � , �. .� ; s '_'L-�? � � ' '� .' .,_ ,#' .t/'.., _ r1y.�1 ...�n...'"'^e.�' �.. � n..,. . � ,.. ... � __ \ # � ^+�!` " '�. 6 Preserve Our Plateau Annexation ♦ In November 2005 residents of the East Renton Plateau PAA submitted a 10%petition calling for an annexation by election ♦ In February 2006 Council held a public meeting and adopted a resolution calling for an election on the question of whether+ 1,475 acres of the East Renton Plateau PAA should be a�nexed to the City ♦ In March 2006 City invoked BRB's jurisdiction requiring that a public hearing be held ♦ The BRB held public hearings on the POPA on June 14th and 15t" of this year i - . - - - - � - - � . .�,;��*� � 3 � t a i.' � ��'j�� t iR c'" .F� � :+` �aq �+, t �h."�s �'�MS' �{ Viw� � � .c�s� �a �,� `� . �. M. . ' q�„ � ,C . .�i' ' iwP'�' � �?� �� Y�'2�.�� y�: � .- t y`:.� ��` ��`"�"� ,�. ` ` rr,�` ,e .W .� � cr *'Y a y . :� �. . , � ��. a t'm'; ',�� aJ� � �"'w•� .,�, ;"' �� , . q�$y� � � �w-��y�w� +,,. 1r,��.�� .•�..►e ?"` '� . ,'�y `., ��, r ' � Ihjti� ��..p�i� ' � ,�"��y ��--'S" � � '�4".a a. —..� -�` `_ Y��. �� .58,, � �r � 7�i r � ,�I►�i �y '';MriW.ii.��pf:.�ii`� �� _� �.;."+.�.�'rti + 3�,�-�: � ��+.t� '1'+�.. .�1.. � .:!;v-r i 1-`��*� i e s � .� i��J��. � �t� . y .��'� ' - s.{� .. �:�l� �Y'., � � R.;':t�� 4 '�r'+� �'+ '`" ��4°� �* „t.�l "t w „ i:ls� �L,..�: ° . rt .�`�t .'��.rA�,s��., '"twlr"�:� ' ;'�'� . �$ s,,y�a�'`wi'.r« ��i: ��j 1 'q� i,� `,�•ti�j T�'k-_(C'�'��7� r �� "y,��b��f*^ fY J,� K.t� r r +- �� .,�. :�:r'�+It�?:�J� � �G ,. "� �:'� • r♦♦�+� ��:3 .�� F . &�� ` .��f� x$�-�� '� �;, �.� 3,.$��`n�. �l;J ., .4. �►.:.�� sa. T' �'�lf' �. ��Y,y.s��wt�I�, r �1..�1 a1:.'f ! � ,� �'�{ � � 1 +t t �,,��y� 3 : -��,'� `'j�7� :�ti r w. e�. �ti. r�'�t�w4rY�� -t' .r�'-�f"`y ''�� '#� '�..:�. �F '+�, a �*r C 'i ✓ .�.,. � .,� t y�j �f�N'"�f+�'° �,�j��p��.��Y'Zi'r� +�t�� ''*'e� �'�ly1��,�y' y�d.. ��'�r[y�f��. ��'aL.w,��y: •....�R..ti�$"� ��Y�•'� r t.� „d� �i , °t'�, i '�., 1 .�"�,�' ' � i .+' 1. . � ` 4,� �� I� �'1'�C: �. .,�.P°.'3' � ,� y` � ,,`, �,s : !y, .v� ��S'a:� }' �,fi r,� ,r't� ,,� � � T� ;.' � � -.a r ��rf .�!'�,,r`.��` �t°�' _d /iC �<'� +r.r•' . � y y( � ,� �r �r A��y. ,."' . rr��+�'�'�7� e�.+,<; .�..�,y��>'��2 �.t •' a��,-'�' *st,�- 1��{ � • y %.Y � �'J :�{{� - M ��.,e Y.�. �.(3. ,. '"'�s Y R . b 1`.' rtpwM �,(r . �'"�Y'.9s�-�`�. �; � � ^'�C ,�:r� ''"'h'.+..._, -*+,!.iJF+"!.�„�'@�".�� C- �ti3��"�.�r1� � `w�1�..��y ��. oposed Preserve Our Plateau Annexation __. A��e,a„o�Bo�,�,ry 1 Map -- Renton Ciry Limils .. '.,. I . . . - N:'.r.:x , I . . `�: - Hre._ .. � . .. L'_ � �� 'f "�� "��'�a��y � ��1� T � . � . � . s .. � r �M � � f l�� ' s 'zz� '`� �� ; W� i � t�te .3S 6 � Y Tyt it � � . f �. �� v�.k, :�+�[.� - . i] �> r i ..�`m" ' �}* K 1.b �S. yy�.'"Y 'g : A�r�' � .F `,.Z' ' T � � �^' .� )�i~� K ��. , , ... � - k f �,3NF t�y �3 �k��S L 'f. 3 ` �.; �.:'{ �_ �,+v '� t�`��' Yk,y ��+ _y . _ A *� ' )� � i � , . ' y �.�� x Y a M , �� ..•: . � � l f <� '�� . '�t �*J �r,'2/�_ s 4y 'F 4 l w .� � . . s �� a � s imv �4. �� .��y .� � � � 1 r«a.v '�'� � ,� � ��y,��, * �, ; �. 3� y 4{• � � .; � � �WCm"1'^.� R Ji.. � +� .� �' =_'� ��. :i.'�*`� -.�� ..`�!. J �� J.�G Y � 9 nki ��': �},.. *$� ' �1 ..� �� "} � .' - s ., t) �� t �,a*� F � � �.�g� r � y'�('al�'s'�� n,,,"� `-v%`�� s 1F � .u.t� _�+aY' . -`°` �YP� � .. . w ' .1�MIM1��'�, t- \ � . . . . . ,.. U�w.. . \ .. c� y„< ,�. �. . � �Y u ��,` "` -� : :,� � ,, ,,�� ,� , l �.,�— y : t '� r. �J'L„/� ! ;,i•�,_ _ / • �,�,.'�L;c� ` � '� "'• � . —r.e --�.i � ` ''- r� "�►� _ ��, �� (�� ,. -,,� � - � , � : � �� _.� f,�y , s� �° ,' �� ,, . � � � ✓ � - y e'_. • rt�`'�r.�. ;":�.:�s _ -_ .��. �'` �:__ l � oposed Preserve Our Plateau Annexation AnneaationArea raphy Map -- Renton City Limits 8 f: Y � _ . y � � 4rv.<� .. _ _.a I ' � L.�._._. .. M � . e.. � � , �. ._ ,_ � ` _ �\n v�m s�,; r t Vmn s� I ` . . � s ,em s�. ` \ L x � I 4 IJfiC 5� .. �'{ i*��e 51 I ? - +� !h Sr � .. p � ._._p� b q Y!!n s1 � y A r.xm R � .s i1'N u y . ��` �— 3 tAU YI. � � '+ ��'��— 'A _ 5 � �.. <�4�.K�r SI �, U n . . Y 1�.n. . 4�.Mm 5� � � � '.Ae�1� . . . Y . .. �' y� A�tA;n?� lme � M ��, ,�91nq Y �, M - . . a ` i:3i�G' : Y i'.9�A R i � _ \ I , Y�C!�4+ � � � .. 7 . _ ' ' �Ci.;_ S� I .. .. _ �. b t�aN St . v. . t i p \ � �I .. . e s g�y L�. '1,D2' SE ItYa 51. M HI k" 2n 5 ^ � . . . .f,a5�., � ,u,n Si �. _ .8 � - � a' . . a �� Y r�1i.S! ""I N £�+5} q � tl.R SF 11.5rw�,+, � B , iN Y tlf y�•� � � /� . Y �� / — � `5`i��6:w R . a ',�. � ' r�� 9 � � / Y�BxY �' 4�nryn5t — _ `;�/"/� " 1 `� � .� i ItAI..A -� � / ��fj �; i�J �` � ''_�_ r— - �'`��t�� ,i ��Z�,� � �� /. j` a �i � � � / � , _... . �; , - o -� / ' � '��, �F.., � � r..,aa �_ __`1 � �, �� .T�\� _ oposed Preserve Our Plateau Annexation __ Rn;,��ry�;� logy Map - - Urban Growth Boundary • � � I • 1 1 . � ; ' 'Y .,., } y > � ' � �� :a x _ 3� Ye .a � � � _.. '.f'..T� �S . � . � . k , j� .. _ �. . y �. � . . � ' . .,.� . _ .. . - � ��`�.A.,�-� .M. , ��f ,,.. t , 3 � . y ... . .r��Wns�. . ......� S r `-_ . . .. � � v�en i _ .�....., . - � u � . ., ... . a� � s � , . _ � x�n.;s� . . i�,y+ .. ..iF - . ': �� ' . ��-� . ' , . ' . .. ... ^ a � . �.� � �. 5 . � � c �� ..�. r na � � �� . � � �- � II� � r � .. � �. . . ..: F .., ... .. »��.3� ' . _ . . r n Y'Nu � . � . � .�v.s ... . . . .. j . � � .. � T t',', J 1__._._�/�'_-,� . Y+ • S ' .... _ � ' � . ` ��.. � .r4�"4n' 4. . - � . ' . __�;� '� _ ... ,... , I k is �'o'. .. � �. �'�",4i�w.. '��. County Park Lands ,,,,..o,,,P,�,...„„,,,o�.,,, ', _P. , -�- R�nan CM�mb . ........�.:,.,........�.. .. _ _ ' ,�......,..,.-... U.br�OoMli Bar4xy I 9 . � � �� Fire District N o.l _.. � ;i� � ; p I -.. • �'. � #;f" �T � � � ��x� � , F ��1 , . _ i ��s � ,� : ��' ,.�:vA, '�; , � ;x. , District No. 25 :, � ,�: �_. '� _ �� ''`—� ' �,*. � `� �_ .�.. � K ` 4y'� � 1 � � Fire District #25 �, _;�� .,. t. � E-cuncnu�Ch�clepm�nL t+aigtilxHh�.ai�K�tr:+�cgi�:Pl�nnmg .�.... � �� :\Icc P t I�..�.I,��ni i .. � i; Ik1 It — Renton CMlimts � Fira DistriQA75 , ��^�++^""5 —Urben Growtl�9ounAery �Preserve Our Piateeu Pv±nexaean 6o�,ndry � � ♦ � i � , • i � � ., . ,.. . ... � nwts � _ � y � �w • .F _ , . , _- __ .+__ �i; ___ .s 4 �6 F i -a 4 0 , 4 .� �.� -_i..�: ,y, �� .7 < i TOTALS� .��t6 < � �9� 1.06C� � ��.�� f .r � _ I . . ' .., s,. s , . , .. ... �: c. .. . ,. ..�,„ _ & � . y fi � .. . � . � � - �a..��e�- � ,. .. .. . �Kxc �_.�� . „1 . S . ��z _. . .ti��sima 'c:rt� }�. � s " II ^ .3 4 � � 1 . .. ., - �-' t v � 3 }. v , y ,i,..... I.sse �;� � i.i . . � . a�I�s . q...�.,. ' � . . 4 r r . � �..:.? aYl�l.�. � . . .... � 5 tAi 4 .� � .. ; � - C'%hn. r 4.H�h f �. . . . � ' iV ` `4. � �� ~�� ` � : ¢. q � -. � - . .��.. i..:k A - � . . .��.5� � _ ... _ . .rn . . . . . �. �:. 3'� � s..�r.a � - � �. „ ^� < � �Y r ..,,� v.�.r.. � . . � � . . < t - m �. y - ,. _ s .. .✓-- ��, y ., * � _ _ . yx^s. - � N. ��o�*4 �..r. ; y . ,*,; �� . � �: , - .....� `*a- l _, � . . y'a. ` --_,. ' 2+...�. � . I� p ed Preserve Our Piateau Annexation _�,�„�,,q,,, , He�nor+Gky L1nNa t 1 O ..0�........�,.�........... ..... - - �Jrban Craxtn Ba.r9ary S 1 O East Renton Plateau Urban Separator ♦ Issues — Should there be an urban separator in the East Renton Plateau? — If so, what would be the most appropriate area(s) for such a separator? ♦ Countywide Planning Policies support designating lands that provide environmental, visual, recreational, or wildlife benefits between urban and rural areas (Policy LU-27) ♦ Such areas are protected with low density zoning for at least 20 years and typically are part of a regional open space system (Policy CC-6) Concept of an East Renton Plateau Urban Separator ♦ In compliance with Countywide planning policies, urban separators are designated RLD and zoned R-1, 1 du/net acre ♦ Under City code, designated urban separators must establish a contiguous open space corridor, and ♦ Under City code, dedication of at least 50% of the gross acreage of such urban separator parcels must be set aside as "non-revocable" open space ♦ Such "open space" is limited to passive recreation, pedestrian trails, animal husbandry, and existing structures and utilities Concept of an East Renton Plateau Urban Separator ♦ Potential Areas for this designation — 210-acre Briarwood East (Renton Suburban Tracts) area at the eastern portion of the proposed POPA where parcels are typically lh to 1.0 acres in size — 38.3-acre Renton Fish and Gun Club, and — The± 57.6 acres of undeveloped County park lands west of 156t" Avenue SE, and — The larger parcels west of 154� Place SE, north of the Renton—Maple Valley Highway, and south of the Maplewood Heights, Cedar River Bluff, Briar Ridge and Briar Hills subdivisions at the top of the bluff , _ � w � .i .o. �. � Donald Erickson - Re: confirming we notified King County... Page 1 �_.__ . , From: Bonnie Walton To: Erickson, Donald; W ine, Marty Date: 09/15/2006 11:06:00 AM Subject: Re: confirming we notified King County... The resolution for both POPA&fireworks elections were just signed yesterday. The transmittal letters will go out today or tomorrow. You all will be copied. I have to be out of the office for a while today, but will be back later. Bonnie »> Marty W ine 9/15/2006 10:45 AM »> about the POPA election?Just checking. thanks Marty x6526 Revised Code of Washington and Washington Administrative Code Page 1 of 1 , Mcrniai� �h �S+�rvi�as�nt�r � �'rarfS�r"n� �a�f�r fcu°E��l�r��mr�L.c��' �v�.��E t-17`tull.,�,.�;�:_��e ..... C?�,�ument F��sults C�vc�Result� Search Farm , �IF�S�C Hor�e New Search Prev Match Next Match Clear Highlights Find Similar Prev Section Next Section .,:i{�", .... '<t?: ?t::_:3 ��.? `t,�'X��e�,1�� „ii{��.`;.;''�7 �A. �� ,��i�.��,1�➢�) ��`°'�t ��'� �'°j'�� Decision of the county annexation review board-- Filing--Date for ��z'�::._.__,��:�tc:,�� c��r�:,�r�tiv��:c�t�� election. :;;.�.1=;:>°..i��t� :ca�� c;�t•��ir��`:�.rsr� After consideration of the proposed annexation as provided in �•:i. t� 35A.14.200, the county annexation review board, within thirty days after the final day of hearing, shall take one of the following actions: (1) Approval of the proposal as submitted. (2) Subject to ��."�� 35_02_..170,modification of the proposal by adjusting boundaries to include or exclude territory; except that any such inclusion of territory shall not increase the total area of territory proposed for annexation by an amount exceeding the original proposal by more than five percent: PROVIDED, That the county annexation review board shall not adjust boundaries to include territory not included in the original proposal without first affording to residents and property owners of the area affected by such adjustment of boundaries an opportunity to be heard as to the proposal. (3) Disapproval of the proposal. The written decision of the county annexation review board shall be filed with the board of county commissioners and with the legislative body of the city concerned. If the annexation proposal is modified by the county annexation review board, such modification shall be fully set forth in the written decision. If the decision of the boundary review board or the coun � annexation review boar is favorable to the annexation ro osal or the ��,��^'"� g� `'"f' pro osa as modified by the review board the le islative bod of the cit at next re u ar meetin i to be held within thirt da s after recei t of th its g g � ] �,� ecision o e oun ary review oard or the county annexation review O ✓� board, or at a specia mee mg o e e wi m t at penod, shall indicate to 46 e{ /�. the county au rtor its pre erence or a specia e ec ion a e or su mission of / su sa ,wi any mo i ications made by the review � �� ,�,o oar , o e vo ers o t e terntory ro ose to e annexed. T pe special I L_ �__y, e ection ate that is so m icate shall be one of the dates or s ecial �n;� (,t,�t i t o n N�'ti' elections provided under*I�C`�� 29.13.(}2Q that is sixty or more days after C.��,'� M L the date the preference is indicated. The county legislative authority shall �•��v call the special election at the special election date so indicated by the city. �Psdlu(in� � . K C �. �n� If the boundary review board or the county annexation review board ��dr�Ga � �� disapproves the annexation proposal, no further action shall be taken thereon, and no proposal for annexation of the same territory, or i'� ��/j,� W� substantially the same as determined by the board, shall be initiated or � � considered for twelve months thereafter. [1989 c 351 § 5; 1986 c 234 §30; 1975 lst ex.s.c 220 § 15; 1971 ex.s. c 251 § 7; 1967 ex.s. c 119§c�:t.l�4.E��t�.] NOTES: � � � http://search.mrsc.org/n�cdgateway.dll?f=templates&fn=legpage.htm$vid=rcwwac:leg 08/23/2006 r M -� Washington State Boundary Review Board For King County Yesler Building, Room 402, 400 Yesler Wny, Seattle, WA 98104 Phone: (206) 296-6800 • Fax: (206)296-6803 • littp://zvwzv.metrokc.gov/rrnnexations August 11, 2006 City of Renton Attn: Don Erickson, ACIP Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 RE: CLOSING LETTER FOR RESOLUTION AND HEARING DECISION File No. 2231 - City of Renton - Preserve Our Plateau Annexation (POPA) Annexation Dear Mr. Erickson: We are writing to advise you that the Washington State Boundary Review Board for King County has now completed the Resolution and Hearing Decision, as specified in RCW 36.93, to approve the above referenced proposed action filed with the Board effective: August 10, 2006. The Resolution and Hearing Decision for this action is enclosed for filing as prescribed by RCW 36.93.160(4). An appeal period to Superior Court has been established, as mandated by RCW 36.93.160. The appeal period to Superior Court will close on Se�tember 9, 2006. In order to finalize the proposed action, the applicant must address the following requirements, where applicable: 1. Compliance with the statutory requirements and procedures specified in the Notice of Intention; 2. Sewer and Water district actions and some other actions are also subject to approval by the Metropolitan King County Council. If the Council makes changes to the proposal, the Board may then be required to hold a public hearing. 3. Filing with King County of franchise application(s), as required, accompanied by a copy of this letter. 4. Filing with King County of permit application(s), as required, accompanied by a copy of this letter. Page two continued, Form HE8 5. Notification to King County Office of Regional Policy and Planning, in writing, of your intended effective date of this action. This notification should be provided as early as possible. Please send this information to Elissa Benson, Office of Management and Budget, 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3200, Seattle, Washington 98104, and 6. Filing with King Counry Council of: (1) one certified copy of your final resolution or ordinance accomplishing this action; and (2) a copy of this letter. This document should be filed with the Clerk of the Council (Attn: Ms Anne Noris), King County Courthouse, Room 1025, Seattle, Washington 98104 If you have questions or would like additional information, please contact our office at 206.296.6800. Sincerely, Lenora Blauman Executive Secretary Attachment: Resolution and Hearing Decision dated August 10, 2006 Cc: Ms. Anne Noris, Clerk of Council Ms. Debra Clark, King County Department of Assessments Ms. Lydia Reynolds-Jones, Manager, Project Support Services Mr. Dave Wilson, Records and Elections Division Mr. Paul Reitenbach, Department of Development & Environmental Services Mr. Elissa Benson, Office of Management and Budget Mr. Dave Monthie, Department of Natural Resources King County E-911 Program District(s): King County Fire Protection District No. 25 Eastside Fire and Rescue (No. 10) Issaquah School District No. 411 Renton School District No. 403 Proposal for East Renton Plateau Area Task Force Scope of Work and Schedule July 20, 2006 A community Task Force for the East Renton Plateau will be convened by the City of Renton. The purpose of the Task Force is to provide recommendations on community planning in the Preserve Our Plateau Proposed Annexation Area. Task Force Membership The Task Force will consist of seven members appointed by the Mayor and ratified by the City Council. The membership will reflect commercial, community, property owner and resident interests in the proposed annexation area. Meetings will be public. Membership on the Task Force is designated in the following positions: 3 seats Resident Property Owners Resident property owners representing diverse geographical areas within the proposed annexation boundary East of 168th St 168"'to 156`" St nominee Michael Turner City limits to 156`h St 1 seat Owner/operator of a commercial business in the proposed annexation boundary 1 seat Community organization operating in the proposed annexation boundary including 5 Star, Church organization, Boy scouts/Girl Scouts, 4 H or similar organization nominee Kerry Abercrombie ( 5 Star Organization) 1 seat Four Creeks Unincorporated Area Council nominee Tom Carpenter 1 seat CARE organization (annexation proponent)nominee Gwendolyn High The Task Force will meet beginning August 22th until the effective date of annexation. Meetings will occur on Tuesday afternoons 4-6 PM at the Renton City Hall. Staffing will be provided by the Department of Economic Development, Neighborhoods, and Strategic Planning. Task Force participants will be selected from interested parties responding to a outreach by the Four Creeks Community Council and CARE. Purpose The purpose of the Task Force is to review the adopted"Vision" for the East Renton Plateau area in the context of Growth Management Planning, provide input to the City on pre-zoning the area, on community planning issues such as transportation, parks, and community character, and a transition to the rural areas, and to identify a recommended list of potential implementation techniques. July 21 through 28 recruit and interview prospective task force members July 31S`Agenda bill due 1) Pre-zoning and 2)Formation of Task Force August 7 Referral to Planning and Development Committee or Community Services August 9`k'Renton Planning Commission Staff briefing on pre-zoning proposal. August 17 Appoint of Task Force Planning and Development Committee or Community Services August 21 Committee Report establishing Task Force at Regular Council Meeting Scope of Work Meeting 1 August 22 1. Introductions, purpose and work program 2. Identification of a list of issues and topics that Task Force members define as important to residents of the East Renton Plateau Potential Annexation Area based on work done by the community through the CARE organization 3. Briefing on Pre-zoning proposal Meeting 2 August 29 Focus on Planning and Growth Management Context ("Planning 101") and Zoning l. Focus on the existing City policies for the area, what the City's responsibilities are under Growth Management, and how the proposed pre- zoning works. Task Force discussion of alternatives and amendments as needed. Meeting 3 September 5 1. Staff presentation on background information for other major issues (outside of zoning) identified August 22nds`. e.g. transportation, parks, community character 2. Complete recommendation on pre-zoning Non Task Force Meeting Wednesday September 6�'6:00 PM Presentation to Renton Planning Commission on pre-zoning is scheduled. Planning Commission recommendation to City Council to occur that evening Non Task Force Meeting Thursday September 7'h 3:00 PM Briefing on Prezoning at Renton City Council Planning and Development Committee Planning Commission and Task Force recommendations will be presented. Non Task Force Meeting Sept 11`h Public Hearing on Pre-zoning Renton City Council Meeting 4 September 19 Visioning Workshop Discussion of a desirable future vision for this area within the context of the City's planning objectives and responsibilities addressing issues identified by the task force . Meeting 5 Oct. 3 Visioning Workshop II Staff will prepare a written draft of the vision identified in Meeting 4. Key tools for implementing the vision for the area will be identified based on the background information provided in earlier sessions. The group will be asked to review and prioritize implementation tools. Meeting 6 October 10 Review and Finalize Report The report will be viewed for final review for presentation to the City Council Non Task Force Meeting October 16 Second Public Hearing on Pre-zoning Renton City Council Non Task Force Meeting October 20 City of Renton Planning and Development Committee Review and Discussion of Task Force Report and Recommendations Committee Report adopting Pre-zoning Committee Report accepting Task Force Report and referring work items to the Planning Commission and Administration if needed October 23 First reading of Prezoning Ordinance, Approval of Committee Report October 30 Second Reading of Prezoning Ordinance November 6 Election November 21 Identify Transition Issues December 5 Discuss and review transition issues Identify needed Comprehensive Plan amendments/rezoning requests December 19 Staff presentation on final report addressing transition issues January 9 Review Final Report and Issue Recommendations ,r , . January 18 Present Final Report to Planning and Development Committee Committee Report January 22 Reading of Committee Report and referral of work program items to Administration and Planning Commission if appropriate. Completion of Task Force work. Jun ?4 06 02: 24p Wsbrb For Kc z062966803 p. l �- c� � > � ` -o.' o � �� C�u NOTICE aF PUBLIC HEARING WASHINGTON STATE BOUNpARY REVIEW BOARD FOR KiNG COUNTY Y�SI.�R BUI�orNG, ROOM 402 400 Y�SLER WAY SEATTLE, WA 981�4 PHONE: 206_298.fi800 T7"Y: 206.296,1024 C1TY QF RENTON — PRESERVE OUR PLATEAU ANNEXATlON THE WA$HII�GTON SI'ATE BOUNUARY REVIEW BOAR(�FOR KINCi COUNTY WILL CCINDUCT A F'UBLIC H�ARING Fc7f2 n CITY UF RENTON NI�UPU;AL TO ANNGX 1�7$ACRES (PRESEI�V� OUR PL.A'I�!\U}ON WEDNESC�AY, JUNE 14, 2�06. AT 'T'HG C;QNCLUSION OF 'fHAT IIEARIN<�, THE BUUNDAF�Y RF_VIEW BOARD W!I_I_ DETFRMINE WI IFTHE}Z TO CX'fGNCJ 7H[hIE/�F�ING l'p TIiURSUAY,JuNE 15, ZQOE�7. A[3RIFF L[GnL DESCRIPl'ION AN�MAP F�R�fHE PR�SEftVE OUR PLATEAU/1NNEXATION IS PRCIVIDED QELOW. THE COMPLET[FU,.�MnY QE C)B i'AINED FROM THE OFFICE OF T H[ BOUNpAI�Y REVIEW�pARD. "TU I�FCI.ASSIf-Y c:ERTAIN REAI. I�ICUI�F.R7Y�AST OF nlE TXISTIMC:C�7Y UF FiF.N7UN'S CITY LIMIYs,ne�GIZIC+ED AS ALL Of2 Ppltf IONS UF 5(:(:)�p�,; 1 1,13, 14, �5,2�ANU 14�fUWNSHi1'1:i NORTH,RANt;L S EAS'f,AND AI.L C>K POR'1'IUNS QF 51_CTIONS �8 AND�J TUWNf;HIP Z:j NOf7Tfl, �ANfiL� EAST,WI[I qMETTE ML'-'131DIAN IN KIN('y G�?UNTY,WASHINC�Tc)N , 13E�N(;I.00A'fED WI:';T OF 1 H�'H Av1-N1.1t;$�AND SOtl�rl OF:i� 9:i?N"STftGET,Wf;;T OF 1 GflT��AVC SE ANU SOUTH Of'' SE 92F3�"ST, wr•s('OF ')SETH AVFNUE S�ANU SOi.lill OF SC 1"ZOThST,�,Sr o� 1447X Avr: SE ANU NokrH ur S[ '�38��f'L�f/�$T OF T rJZ�'AVL SE AN[)N(IkTN U�SE 1�12r"'S')',F..AST OF 15��I�L.S�/�NO NpRTI l�F SE JCNJES RD.�� I I.._f+ '(V £1 6tlF.�1f�l�i-bl I�:.7J�FJ2I 'i�]�p k�.W�V_��.sitl__.1��LT�� 1L1 71 _ i � . p � -T _ � �.L) 1 th S{ ��.�� ,�� 1a _ � _-_ _ _ _ - _ � '. �'' � - ��-•.'' y - � (3�_ .= _ ., _ - ai�� -r_ " � �., � r ! 1 F �s�� - � -i- ,��. '�11-.r - � � _� -�< �._-� � - �R�ii � �1�1 _ f f�f}I af� = - — -- _. n �� _,TT x FuiR�lf_�� in_-_ �f�1� C��I��=J�� °-� � - - — �1� _�_�'i - -�_��" �1 UT rr1r %1 �� .c� J _:- - (��r�- f-- - _� __ - tl��lti1�" ' . H - �t .1 •_ -- ---•- r�Lrl�.fl�l �, H •_ .�, - : . --�- '- ��:t��( �' _ � ;;� �,� `� cx � u�4E _ , iR� �_ �. S - - � .0 tr.W� T r.37_P] I � ',.f Q'��[� f T� ��c�.a�rh��! �, 1��'_-.� �l-`r�L�] 1� }.:''.i. - -� "4� )I ...ltui�� . :: a ��I��A-?ilTll7 1°+''� 1� CY�i�i�ci;" " . lh�' �� .� n _ ,A� -*�.�,; � �'�`�� .IIC ��: .' �� rr'�,'�,. ��. �--�— --- - :: ' —-- . ,' _ , - �o�� - :.��: � _ �:�� - - �� . �'� .�� - .� , - ��t� �� - _ - ' �_w+. -•f "I�I 1 t _l.�.'l�F.'IIT �1: - '� .w� . T!Z' i !-'"-�Y. �;4• 4 JL b �_... _r::-_-::..-_ ./�_l i f � , � � ._, - .�� .�_�_ �-�._.�:L-�:�� .��if:��_ :;��-�i��iri�r�.>.��.�',��<::1�--- � Preserve Our Piateau Annexation TFIE PURP�SE OF 7HE I�UBLIc;HC�RING IS 7C)►iF.�R 7'EsTIM(�NY nNo pELIB�RATF DN TIlE PROPOSAL. T ESTIMONY ANI� F/�CTUAL,MATEF2IAL CONCFRNING"THE P120PUS/�I_ MAY k�E F'RESENTED TO THE BOARf] UP TO AND INCI_UDING Tlar rUBLIC HtqRING. !�T TH[ �QLLUWING TIME ANU Pl_AGC, lNTGRE;;TED PCRSUNS MAY APPEAR AND B[ IIF„�k0 Wf1�H REFFRENCF r0 • �Alf�PR['�ERv�QUfz PLn'fEAU ANNEX/��I�IUN F'I�Uf'C.);;AL. DATE: WEDNESpAY JUNE 1a, 2006 T1ME: 7:00 P.M �OCATIQN: MAYWOOD MIpDLE SCHOOL 14490 168`�' AVENU� SE RENTON, WA 98059 /1D�: ThIE CjOUNUARY RCVI�W F3C�ARU CC)NDLICTs l�LI MLE7INC,S ANU hlEARINGS 1N I..00ATIONS 'fl Ini AfZ[ WHEF„I_ChIAlR ACC.F.SSIDLF. ANY PFRSON 111_QU1hW(� OTllFfl SF��Cl/1L nS�;I:;TnNCE SHOULD CONT�IC:'f TliF.. BOUN�AFtY RFVIEW BOqRf� Ar �E�ST 1 wc� HU��IN!":;:� nAYS PRIOK TU TI�iE MFE I1NC�, TfIE BOnRD WILL MAKF LVFRY RFASC)N!\BI..f=GFFURT TU PRC)vl(]E nC(:C)MMODATIQNS, . ""' � - 1� ,`r f,'";'„ r` .. � � �;_-�/� �'� ,� ,;��- �; r r �� C � ��i��j� .�� ,,�� : � �� 1�F� ; ; c 'f n ` /'4 ' �' �, ��,��, �' `�� r��. t l � � � G � ., , P��y�� , � � d `�� ;�,i �: �''�\��, � �!��,�.��.�'�.�,�x�� , , , �� _ � � � �, �,� f . . �_��' 1 r �� ' ��,�.. � �2�.1G �:�� P,�f�.c� �-v �. J � � , � ,t ; � � , ��.�c�.��.s.,�, �, �.� a,�^-,�� :��, ��2�-E�---- , .1�^ti�f�,X�,,.; :X��,,;v ��+-�� r�f) r � p � � ,,C j1;��'� �"�,��P��,,�� ,i B ��`1;';,,�A��'�V ��.i Ir��'b 1 �'�!J �,'�'�`��j�"�t '�(`,u✓�4'� I''�i/r..�,�d'�`�� t f � (�:,} • i n y �i (�'` � '1 {P, . � . , � ��, r�W 4 N �\, �f�Cl�� .�� ' 1 .Iy�l �� '' �(.�..,��.Y� ArJ� � �. ��,j.�.�11.�y �� I�''i �''t !`� �1 � ��.i �,��' r,�l�" V� t�i � "Ji5 ,"�' ):�� ';� � E �, �6 ^ �y�t�l'�'i, Y�-�� `. �"� /� A 1� , �.�-�'� � � �,� �''� ,r `y I 'a� v��'' �, J 3 % M1 .:� .t �i �+ r ; : �t` ��ft�l � ,;,k,`� ��,�-- • � �� c��:� �� , �� ... � , �. � � � . � }�—` , r� n �� ,�,�? � ��-1��j �� ',i:,�.,c� �';�.,'v�v�Q �j `� k�r��'�� _ �--�.��3�� -- �; �;� '�' . . P � y� � � � C , �r �'� ,�' �� ,�/, ,��(/;� � /jy��:��: p�/�.�x�, � .., IL • �' �i}'t��:.��r!'� �r�-, l f'� � �l�- �r .;,9r�l�V,' t 'C` ^ li�l+`�"` � ��,/V'l u'S' \ J � (`, � � � ` n J � P �� J � ' -� y�� '� �� '� . .. �,�_� '\f,�r} _ . � �� Jt�/ �J + �5�� /��,�� ` V � � '! � � n h rI� '�'y ' (� o l�!f �� /��' , '�/i 1'" 1�V� __ � �`%/ > � ;/I � ��p ,'�J; �,.�,'�°�P .� u ��✓�'��'`"'� �`%i�L cJV�L��.� � �� ` VV��`- „ G," -�•'1".1. ��v1 �yV��,�v,;�. , � I t � `7 II Jy1 F�. . } 'S � � ,�ry j'��(:(��.��i �,'T ��{�t��i l � . .� "� . f IC�f" "' ��:V� _'l'.•G r � `�` ' + �� 4 O � �{, � �} , � "�, "�/� � ` ,� ! i L � F t�ti �� ., !�! �.�� ?�/ G+3-`r`" l��'�Jl/;,.�t� i ��'� i � � ��;� .�. '� � (� �� ,�.. J (%� r7 W /� � , , � � � �- " �� .��'�it�� '� ,�`�� 'd"�/f_`� ��f''-� ryf"'' ��f��g�''� �'��, � I A� a l �' i.`,�. �� '✓��'-� lf,.�� r� ��',��1�'� r� f�,,� `�� °� ,��.� .� �r��y , { /, `; '�� ,. �� ,rfl'��a��,�' �� ,�'�ti� �� r � �. �� ,� ��,� �� ,, -/il , � G;,,� �-, �`/'/ � l! � ' V �� / �/� �''�( �nn � ! �} �[� �'p� , y Y� , � (J,._� �!J' t/v.'' � �#J7jI�y/hll��r✓f'L� �'t�r(V f 4� l � `f � y` (�/U� f�v � 7 � �� , i �,1 'G �?!/L'4i j'U�`��,� ��'" `� `��;' .'��' j c �'��/;�� ,/� °i;�' � V �� I � 4 /,�'�� l r, �!� �� i'1./ r ��. � �' �r l ,, - ��/1�;�ii'1�{�1%�� c.�. {�; l�, „%; , �� f � ( ��; ��'�� . ,+ � ( y �/ r A: �' ' `i y Y � G 'c, � � �/" � � n ��E,�' R n� ' .J � r. ,. \ i '�.k �� ='1S Y'��(1 .��ry,,1:-) v ;,•, ��,. '�+��,�,y^� f yyn� /'.�'t,n.Y' � '`,I�.,�;IJfv��,��w`�'' � ^ I ��, R��k, -�,Y, v *-K. , �1 , '< � ,�,, � � �� y �� , � y _�...._._�+__---� � j` r �' ' ^ � m '� � ��,'(�/(//� i-f�`�'{'/b� � L�a�'�a�✓U� �r�'�� .ji11Al�{'�� 1 ��ir.�l�'6i��1��`r y ' I 1 �Y � ` � �! i. B,� ��-� � �i'i�%,� �� '�'/?f�V '� ! �, ��, "�r;,f�% j��n�''��)�("c 1/��) nlrf'!,�!'�}�� y�';Y�� l�i,��/' yi� l�11� J A ; � !/ r 1 f t f � r 4� r.., l ,' r� , U"2��2� " �.��'� ` ��f�'"' b�r'i;"Uj� (�r-�� _� ; ' �� .�`,2�1�. n � � ,��n �1 � �� v � ; r �' G�-° ;ti � �� ; o t� ; ti,, �� "�� 'v � � � � r y � , ��` �L J ��in �i,��) �I� !�'+�}r �� 'f'� I ��I ��li' V1�J , 1'��v�+n ��.� � �,y�r �-'C�i �, . A \ ,J , - fut�"�,�,�t/,;% �!�. r' .�-_��` �' � �, e1�,��` E � � �� ti �� d � �� '�,��.. �ti Y p� CITY OF RENTON � cs � Economic Development,Neighborhoods and ♦ � ♦ Strategic Planning �� 2O� Kathy Keolker,Mayor Alex Pietsch,Administrator N July 17, 2006 Lenora Blauman Executive Secretary Washington State Boundary Review Board Yesler Building,Room 402 400 Yesler Way Seattle,WA 98104 Dear Ms.Blauman: SUBJECT: PROPOSED EXTENSION OF BRB REVIEW TIME—PRESERVE OUR PLATEAU ANNEXATION(FILE NO.2230) On March 30, 2006,the City of Renton sent the Notice of Intent package for the above referenced annexation to the Board for their consideration. Typically,under the provisions of RCW 36.93.100,the Board would have 120 days after filing to complete their review and make a finding or the annexation would be considered approved. The end of the 120-day review and finding period,according to our records,would be July 31,2006. We now understand that the Board is unlikely to issue its finalized deternunation on this annexation until August 11,2006. T'he City of Renton therefore is willing to extend the 120 day review period until August 15, 2006. In order to meet the March 1, 2007 filing deadline to receive properiy taxes from this annexation beginning in Apri12008, it is imperative that we hold an election on this annexation on November 6,2006. In order to do this and meet election deadlines,we look forward to receiving the Board's Findings and Decision as soon as possible. Thank you in advance for your prompt consideration of this matter. If you or the Board have additional questions,please contact Don Erickson(425-430-6581). Sincerely, Alex Pietsch Administrator Attachment cc: Jay Covington Rebecca Lind Don Erickson H:�EDNSP�PAA�Annexations�Preserve Our Plateau�BRB Extenion ltr.doc\cor 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N /� AHEAD OF THE CURVE �7 Thic nanar mnfainc F(1%rxvclarl mafarial 3(1%nnct rnnci imar - Washington State Boundary Review Board For King Coi�nty Yesler Br.cildifig, Roorri 402, 400 Yesler Wcry, Ser�ttle, WA 98104 Plrone: (206) 296-6800 • Frrx: (206)296-6803 • ltttp://wzvza.irietrokc.goz�/nririex�tio�is July 14, 2006 City of Renton Attn; Don Erickson, AICP Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 9898055 RE: NOTIFICATION OF OFFICIAL FILING File No. 2231 - City of Renton - Preserve Our Plateau Annexation Dear Mr. Erickson: We have received approval from King County engineering staff of the legal description for the above-referenced Notice of Intention. The Notice of Intention is now considered complete and has been officially filed effective: July 14, 2006. You will be advised of any further changes in the status of the Notice before the Board. Please be aware that any future final ordinance or resolution on the proposed action must incorporate the legal description approved by King County engineering staff, including any revisions made in response to the engineering staff review. Sincerely, Lenora Blauman Executive Secretary cc: City of Renton; Attn: Marty Wine, Asst Chief Administrative Officer Anne Noris, Clerk of the Council Lydia Reynolds-Jones, Manager, Project Support Services FORM 12 ' �� ; r �� 1� _ ________ � The Washington State Boundary Revietiv Board For King County Regular Meeting 7:DOPM TlticYsday, J��ly 13, 2006 DDES Hearirtg Roorn 900 Oakesclale AveTcnzse SW Renton, WA AGENDA � L CALL TO ORDER - 7:OOPM Charles Booth, Chair II. ROLL CALL Michael Marchand.,�Vice-Chair �Evangeline Andersor��Claudia Hirschey Robert Cook �Roberta Lewandowski >t' A.J. Culver �Roger Loschen ,�,�� Robert George �(Judy Tessandore �, �y,3��" � —`'�---�Lynn Guttmann •. � J .� C r AGENDA, July 13, 2006, Cortt. Page Two � � Irr. N1rNu�s: /`��:f � i � �'-G`-�r: �''�.lG� � , �.�� !�� W� �, t G � A. Regular Meeting, June 8, 2006 �r__.._ B. Special Meeting/Public Hearing, June 14, 2006, File No. 2231 —City of Renton—. Preserve Our Plateau Annexation(POPA) � .�,�� . �f;i�'��,� �� `�l � �� .�� , ; � � � IV. FILE NO. 2231—City of Renton—Preserve Our Plateau Annexation (POPA),Board v , Deliberation a�td directiojt to tlie Staff on Resolutiofz and Heari�zg Decision 1S , � ,7 // � i� � \ � � /�j f��i}.� `� '�,' ` `,� /�` ^ "%"�`��'� ,t' ,�,.,�� '��i,'Uf�� ,. J�L� /1, l� �'(�,�' � r` 'l�j �.f�L�' ' � � '\ d � V. ADMINISTRATION.• ��= ��,,li,r,':� ��-��''�", 9� (1��J � ,�. ' f � �� ''/b,{,'y/ y� ',�s ^�� ° �� - 1f �. ' ' /� ^G�i p�/ /,.i•j�✓`� i�� •�' / ' ,� ��. �/' .,��c �' ' A. Chair's eport ��%' `'�j�� ' ,,,�, U�P,�t�r=, /��''� � �/ /✓� C�L'� J" - e � 3 M'�o4 6�J :�r-� G v ,,T� � ' /,' ryy�/ q� �v� �`' `/ ,L1 �/i�':%� �f",� i//" G�` //d� ,��v v ,�i+�G',"�/j'�'�f��"��/',�"'L-L .i°"� ' ' ^ L�- � ,/ �� '�'�f 4 �0"V '��f.�'� �- d A�/� .7��, ''f! 'O,'ut�:/L�`1'�u %!'� ��"/� / B. Committee/Reports ��,i�n ��, ,� �i � /`�ti��n '?�. f i� � � { �.,L'�;' �r�,�1,"�,L'�, ,�a1 �+,t�� ;ii�.��/v'�''� ?�" 'l�f .� , > ` ,.9� / /�/ 7'� L% `� � G� � �14� O`� f �-t' �� "�/�""' u%�%GY � � C. Executive Secretary's Report p�� ' j � �- �'j�-/�2 �� '�"��/ , � ��f �f� /, j� j�'!� ,,G�,�� ul�� ,/'� �` l� �D � � ��1�`'"`✓�li.�t�J /�'U" /' � �,k��..,�.�'r!�y''�'� ` /�� (�- t'�� , ✓`�/I,� /'y�'�f �` � ,� v�� oz�O �' �� '�' Clr'.� �,� _t�',,��'-�� y�G,�G� ��t��D , ,C.zr��` D. Corres ondence A .� ; p � ��{ �� ,�� y � -e��-� �� , C'�' n ��"�� ` �� ,��. ,�.��,� �� /�'��;��6�r�/.;;�4��'��,�� `;tz1'-� ' l,�'-, ,�r,,� � _ � �� -��,� �1� U � Lv��' ,, ��f:>.� Memoradum from Executive Secretary Lenora"Blauman, dated June 29, 2006 -�� ,y� ` � `� �� ,� �-y�✓'�^�`'�.C?�3 ��,� f�,�/� , `�� ,_@ f �� °�,' � �� v �� ;�� .� � � � " ' ��'��'�� a ��i��, r�� ' � �� i 6� �� t�L��✓' / ' ' � y� �� l�,r�" � �',�ii� ll,��,�iZ� G�� ' , f��''�(/"�� ,�`' � ! ��i2�."-1��'��""`" � AGENDA, Ja�ly 13, 2006, Cont. `�r• Page Th�•ee VI. NEW BUSINESS: A. New File: File No. 2235—Woodinville Water District- Goldenberg Annexation B. Masterlist ��rrr C. Upcoming Actions VII. ADJOURNMENT � f y AGENDA,Jul�13, 2006, corrt. Page Foitr � BACKGROUND STATEMENT The Boimdary Review Board The Boundary Review Board was created in 1967 by the legislature in part to"...provide a method of guiding and controlling the growth of municipalities..." (RCW 36.93.010). There are seventeen such boards in the State of Washington. The Board is a quasi-judicial, administrative body empowered to make decisions on such issues as incorporations, annexations, mergers, disincorporations, etc., by cities, towns, and sewer, water and �re districts. It can approve, deny, or modify a proposal. Board decisions are final unless appealed to the King County Superior Court. With an appeal the Court reviews the file, exhibits, transcript and the board decision, rather than conducting a new hearing. Board members are residents of the County and serve for four-year terms. They are not allowed to hold other local government offices or jobs. Their compensation is $50.00 per day for work on Board business. Members may not properly discuss proposals under their consideration outside of the public "� hearing (ex parte communications). A�pearance of Fairness Doctrine In general, decision-makers such as Board members must not only be fair in their actions (i.e., have no conflicts of interest), but must also, to the ordinary citizen, appear to be free of any position or influence which would impair their ability to decide a case fairly. However, the State Supreme Court has held that if a person is of the opinion that a decision-maker is so impaired, that opinion must be stated at the first available opportunity. SUMMARY OF HEARING PROCEDURES Sign-in to Speak A roster will be found on the speaker's podium. Those who wish to testify must sign in before witnesses are sworn. All speakers will be called from this list. If you sign in once, it is not necessary to do so at any continuation of the hearing. � AGENDA,Jul�13, 2006, corrt. �,,, Page Five Exhibits Please submit exhibits to staff for marking before the Call to Order. The Board must retain all exhibits until a decision is filed and the appeal period ends (ten days). Speakers Please state your name and address for the benefit of the Court Reporter prior to testifying. When referring to an exhibit, please state the exhibit letter. Time Limits If necessary, the Chair may employ a time limit of 3 minutes for individuals and 10 minutes for organized �"'' groups. Testimonv The Boundary Review Board Act requires the consideration of certain factors (see RCW 36.93.170) and specifies objectives the Board must seek to accomplish (see RCW 36.93.180). Testimony and evidence related to these factors and objectives will be the most effective. Cross-Examination Witnesses generally may not question other witnesses or the Board. The Chair may allow cross- examination of expert witnesses under limited circumstances as described in the Board's Rules of Practice and Procedures. Rebuttal The rebuttal shall be limited to 10 minutes. Rebuttal must be prefaced by a citation of the disputed testimony. Rebuttal may not include closing statements, a summary, or any additional information, unless such information is in answer to questions and issues raised in previous testimony. � � . AGENDA, July 13, ?006, cont: Page Six � � RCW 36,93. 17o Eac�ors ta be con�iciexed.by board�� , � � Incorporation proceedings exempt �rom state enviro.ruaen�al pol:icy act. Tn reaching a decisia.n on a praposal or an alternat,ive, �h� board shall cansider the fac'tors aFtectir�g .such proposal, which shall�iriclude, bu� not be limited �o ttie Fa1lo.wing:� � (1) Po ulation and terri.tory� populat�.o� densi.ty; land axe�, atid land uses; compre ensi and ianing,; as ado�ted under �chapter 35. 63, 35A.63, or 35.7Q RCW7 �,ompreh:en�iv.e plans and development regulati,ons ado�ted uttder �chapter :36,70A RCW� applicable service agr.eements en�ered .into urid.er ch�ptier 36,11S:br 39,.39 RCW; applicable inrerlocal annexat,Lon �;�greements betWe�n a. �county ariii its cities: p.e�. capi�a asses&ed .valua�ion, tpp.oyxaphy� natural baundaries and drainage basins, prox4mi�y t�. a�,h��.� � populated areas; the existe�c.e and p�es�rv�atioti:::of.prime agricultural sails and prod��tive .agricultural ;uses; tt�e li�ksli,hoad � of significant growth in the area and �in adjacent; incarporated and . unincorporated areas during the next �en years�. ;`location anci most. desirable future location v�. cammunity'fa�i�.ities; (2) Mu 'cipal services; need `for inunicipal se,rvices; e�fect of ordinances, governmen a co s, regulations dnd resolutions cn existing uses;_ present cost and adequacy o� governmerital serviaee and cantrols in area; praspects of govex�iunerit�l services From �o�her : sources; probable future needs for• such.�.s�rqicea a[�c�.con�ralsf :� � probable effect .of.pr+,aposal or al�errlatiae an cos�, and ade g� � � servicea and con�rols in �area �nd ad aaent. area�. ttte efEectuon�the� . � � : finances, debt 9trueture, and c.ontra�tual otiligations. arid,righCa;of�.. all atfected.qovernmental ut�its; atld {3) The effec� of the proposal �or. alternative on adjacen�...: areas, on mu u. ecanonuc � c a irateres�s, and'3TI' 4oqernmental structure of the cour�ty. ��" The provisions of chap�er 93.21C RCFt, State Etivironmental Policy, ahall not apply to incorp�ratipn proceedings cove�ed b,y � chapter 35.02 RCW: (199� c 929 � 391 1989 c 84. � 5; 1986 c 234 �;._ 33; 1982 c .220 � 2; 1979 ex.s. c 192 5 1,,•. .1,969 c i89 � 17..� . . ACW 36.93. I80 Objectives -of boundary.r�vie'w boa ti. The decisions of the, bbundary review oar s a attempt to ,aChieae.>the Eollowing ab�ectives: � (11 Preservation of natural neighborhoods ahd communi�i�'s; .. (2J Use of physical boundaries„ includinq but not 1lmited •�o bodies of water, highways, and land con�tours; " • (3) Creation and preservation of logical s��vice areas; (41 Prevention of abnvrmally irreqular, boundaries; (5) Discouragement of multiple incarpbrations of sma11, citie's and encouraqement of incorporation of cities in excess .of ten thausand population in heavily populated urban areas; . (61 Dissolution of inactive special purpose districts; (7► Adjustment of impractical boundaries; (A� Incorparation as Clt�@9 or towns or annexation ko citie� or towns of unincorporated areag which are urban in charaater; and (91 Prorec�ion oE aqricultural �nd rural lands which are designated for long tetm productive agriculrural and. resource u�a , � b}� a comprehensive plan adopted by th� county legislative authority. (1969 c 94 � 6; 19A1 c 332 � 10; 19�9 ex, s. c 142 � Z; 196� c 189 § 1A . ] .. `�-- . .�� , _� ...�i TT_'" � . ;- = '•.:-_!..._, --- -- y .� �... -._ _. �� , t - i. __-� . �' - -�--- � � ��.- � � r ' _ + --- -- - _ -... -- ------•-• _..._ _.- -�•- - --- PI �� , � i _ - �. _1-.v,. � 1,�� -- :i- � � i I � � .} I l l,fE!I.1_" � j� •� ; _ .:.: . ._ ' - -� � ' - --- - --- '-- - -- , � .il.::� i '� � �-- .. '--'-- -- - '-- — _..� . . " ';r:i�"' -1 i - - i - 1-- - -• --..--. -- _ "' ---�r -- - � �--_ i 'S i ��5 ';p _ . 1 � � _�! I'y� 4 Si -�.. , , � �".�. �c % � ' .,,j,_ - < , ., _ _• � 1 :�1 �i-- _� � � � � �t S --- ._..._-- � --� ___ ---� ,,.�,_ _ � � _�` i � � � :.i� "1 -_ -°�':,1�� _---�.___..__..._ - � � I i � -_� - � i---• -4--�-i � � . � I � --x� i-'..- __--� .i_-� - . �� -t-- " I � C � ' � I � i i a,q 4� - ,i (� ,, �� _T..� _ , r-- - ! �� / ' I ' I � � -L-- I � � ( co �J � 1! 0 _ l�. � I- '�,"„ -,�J _ - _;- '-I I �.1-%� ...t"'- � � � h-I "� I __ _, � � � ' ' E�4thS 1 `� `.i:_!_ { ' � I � � -� ��---j I eo f - � � b � f � - � �. -� �7 - i s� , � �28t�St 1 �( I I C � ' i � :; .��_..l _ �✓' ��!.!i I'�' - I � I � G' t----� a �_� .� i ' I I �O � � � �� , _ :� � , �„ , - : ; � � � � _ s� ��e►h �t h _ _ -; � i- I � � L � � � �-{ � ` < fi ��'� .'' �'� �,Jl�} � �- _��_ -�I � � _ -- -_�_�. -- � ,I ��- L r � , . . �[�� I.- j-� � � - --{ _ � �r __ � - ; —� � �-e -` _.i:, / '.'. 3rd st ✓., " -- -- - � -L- - _- - =j =- `, �- - — __ _ j �- _.1__ I �_ , I 1, �- _� 1 � a �; j I' �,,, .� i � r. I , - i � I ' i W � - . ' � `.. -- l, :�: ; --- , ..- � _�_ .-�-= _ -� �-F,� 1 _ � - _-- , - � - i ��d�s �� SE 137nd SL _ �'.!r-y �:�.' -� l .-- -� --�--- --i I �c _j I I � - � N � _,� --_ - -�--- � - �( "_�- J i`_ - f � � O � � O � _ ?+� _ --{ �: .''_ -�i��L' i 1�` �- -'�_ --�--- - -�-�-�_::;_ I � � � � - ' � - _ �r. ,�;. , ; _ .. 11` �- .. --r`f� -_ " �� ts2nd st '�f3 S � < ' f � � -• -�"--�--r�1�. - - � - � - f'� - - } � _�_ o , - '- - < . • . - . , {'� - .. �-_ - _ ' _ ' � — - _r �:. — - -- - _.t- ��u � _� , . - - ._,:,� � -- -._1. � -- Tr-` _.�, ._l._ -34tA st - I-I1� ' � 1 __�`�! --� �, - ,.. s��,a � r � �.��f�,.:%. , _ :� .�fi� s�• � �i� _ , t_ -� � � i - -`�- -�- t�+�h� - � ^ � . � r � �.' �j' -_ - - _� -_ �.�aa_L'. --{ _i. , i i_ i !!t �..,a� � �� ( � � �t C� �J � _- -- - L �' � � I:. ' -c -.:i f, i _.{ � -'1----- - •� , . 6f ;, ��.� - �.__ ��- --- _�_ � � i � � '.l � � E - _ ,,_� - --�- --� - � - �_ � _ - -. � �_ � , - - , ,:_ _�_ - - � _. -_ _ �__�__�_ - - --� _1 - , : � _ , � _ , . . -- _ - � �� - �� "; ��:- . ��ii --- _j'� �' � �� _ < _ ---- ----- _ _ -_ii- - - - . � ��- _ _ -,r '� I ....I � - •-_ _ � � �Iti4�Sti�� !- �,_. " � _ _�T _ _- _ -.�_.= --"—� _� _�' �-� __� i-- - -- - ` �� ' �- - 4- l� -rl- '-..��. -'�_ - -.-.' -----_ - SE S SQ --#- ^�_.� � • _ _ _1 __ --. .___ _' L� _' -- � ' _. ,,V ' t� ' �� - _t�, S ___f_T` �� - _ -- - �iI i - � - - -- ' �� c,..�l.. � ,"c � . ;y "f - _.___ ��t�. - _ __ _ ' ��' u.l - ' ___� _ _� _ -_.. �� - --- r L - � _'" 1 -- - - - - ', - ' � _' :� _�_ {- _ 'b�e - ,LJ�.._ � �� - _ _ - ��_:- - �--- _.__ _.< .:.�" , �� ;; - - - _ ;�,_ �.I. � 4 44Eh �1 � !_� T. _ � -' ` _ __ -- ' � � 1� ` �; -- -- -� :S': -� ;li ,. ?5£ 1' .,�� S..' - - � -_ - - - - ^ � �� ` i ` � _1_ /� ,�. -� ; ,I R ' _ �7� _ "� i � _ _1 , I: � ,, ,-� ; �;I�� ,�,��l , -- - �� j .�._ � ' ��`! :.� '� ,.!C- � I � �� -�. � �� - = � _ � - .1� - �•- 1 � � ' :y' �`u�.-_�r�_ ,\,\ , . I I ' �t I�I_{,.L�1 L:: •� � ar'� __`.. - - - ,. 1� 1` ✓,.� - ' � �: - L J� I ='� � r z llf: , - - � `�t,� �,_. .�-� ` ., _ _ �- �-i. �. :� � 'x�•. � � ',__� _ , _ � - �� 1� - \ � -- �R�,r�, `� ' � �f _ �� ::✓ . !--- ��- ��!_. _ � �' � � � - - � _ I ' -��vr� � t _. � i ) 1 ! ` ( �-; � _ - � � u�u w. 1 ' �ml�y y -:�S � . � � I�•��i�,-. 1 �` ' ' �.\ i . i 1 � ; \ '`�..\, -- I � `� � `"^- _ 1 .1--��'� � -- _.r- � � _ ( i � �'� �` ' � � i �. � . '- -_; - � y-- .`-�- I I / _ l" ! � � 1 i' � � �-.., Preserv� Qur �lateau A�nn�xation ��"�mM�r�°��°`��~fi�a�� w ��, �aW N�armei+o� 'IhM mm f>Gb04Y o'�T�H m�y. Exhibit E1: Proposed annex�tion boundary 0 1J0� 30�4 �., ' S± I c�,m�isiic Ur�rl�q,�ncm.Nc�;�hhurh��dt d:St�a(��ic:Pls�nnirtB L—_ -1 � ,�,.��..,.��,.,��n,��.�..�„� 1 � 1 Rn(a(} WASHINGTON STATE BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD FOR KING COUNTY FILE NO: 2230 CITY OF RENTON PRESERVE OUR PLATEAU ANNEXATION PROPOSED PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULE Jurisdiction Invoked 03/31/06 07/31/06 (120 day review period) BRB Approves Request for Public Hearing 04/20/06 04/20/06 Public Notice 05/09/06 05/09/06 (Legal Notice; Notification to Affected Parties) Publication of Notices 05/13/06 06/12/06 Briefs Due from o�cials and community groups to BRB Office (*) 05/26/06 05/26/06 Packet to BRB 06/02/06 06/02/06 Posting of Si±e 06!05/06 06/05/06 Public Hearing and Tour �96,�•�3,�98 Q6/13/06 Deliberations& Preliminary Decision mav occur here if the �RE3 d�'l�'p ��'�'"1 completes review on this date) /�A�� f��,� 7 Pu b lic Hearing (Con tinue d as necessary) 0 6i i 5/0 6 0 6/15 J 0 6 l A continuing hearing occurs on this date if the BRB requires this time for hearing, deliberations, and/or preliminary decision making. I Staff Prepares R2cord of Proceedings 06'16�06 06;25;06 ; Staff Prepares Decision Report Preliminary Decision Distributed to BRB 07/06/06 07/06/06 BRB Acts Upon Decision Report 07t13106 07/7 3/06 Appeal Period 07/14/06 Q8/13/06 ('') The Board staff ensures that briefings submitted by this due date will be included in the packet transmitted to the BRB in advance of the hearing. Transmittal of materials in this packet provides BRB members an opportunity to review documents in detail. Under statutory mandate, however, materials can be submitted to the BRB at any time up to the closing of the public hearing. Please be advised that due to tie constraints, the Board may have less opportunity to conduct comprehensive review of materials initially presented during the course of the public hearing.. �ti`�Y o� CITY OF RENTON �% �- Economic Development,Neighborhoods and � ru ♦ Strategic Planning � ,�1 Kathy Keolker,Mayor Alex Pietsch,Administrator �'N�0 June 20,2005 State of Washington Boundary Review Board for King County Yesler Building, Suite 402 400 Yesler Way Seattle,WA 98104 Subject: BRIEF SUPPORTING NOTICE OF INTENTION TO EXPAND THE CITY OF RENTON CORPORATE LIMITS BY ANNEXATION Dear Board Members: As required by Chapter 36.93 of the Revised Code of Washington (RCV�, the City of Renton gave notice of its intention to annex temtory referred to as the "Preserve Our Plateau Annexation." That annexation is proposed under the election method in accordance with the applicable provisions of Chapter 35A.14 of the RCW and would incorporate into the City of Renton approximately 1,475 acres of territory for the provision of urban services. To assist in your consideration of the proposed action,staff has prepared the attached brief. Should questions arise during the review of this information please contact Don Erickson, Senior Planner, at(425)430-6581. Also,please send notices and other communications regarding the proposed annexation to: Don Erickson,AICP; Senior Planner Deparhnent of Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Thank you for your consideration. � � Sincerely, � � � r� � � � � ,; � Alex Pietsch o Administrator o 0 r�.t � � � a O N l 055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N AHEAD OF THE CURVF. This paper contains 50%recVcled materiaf,3G`.%Rost consumer �p�. 4 M w � � � .�I ,� � Preserve Our Plateau Annexation Boundary Review Board Public Hearing June 14, 2006 Background • In November 2005, City received 10%Notice of Intent petition calling for an election on the issue of annexation On January 11, 2006 petition was certified by County Elections as having signatures representing at least 10% of registered voters in the annexation area who voted in last general election � On January 31, 2006 Renton requests that the Board hold a public hearing in order to receive public input on the proposed annexation Background, continued • On February 13, 2006 Renton Council adopted resolution calling for an election on the question of annexation but decided against putting issue of future zoning on ballot, prefemng to hold public hearings that residents i can attend � Renton's Council decided not to ask voters to assume City's voted indebtedness since the remaining amount is so little. 2 1 City Of Renton ) � � Merritt U(Phase II) Curreni Annexations r � Perkins 52J ac. . _, Gr .� t5.sac. �'t�- �__. Aster Park ,�.x� _ ._...._,__ `� �t �-� 18aac. KY C�uerin � ��,� h'GAYt�`3`,-� ,;. ` 24.0 a�. �r+ `'` c-'��; ' �. -f" f.ti; � � a eJ �` Hoquiam � �;�. �� "� 'z �'�.. -�� 2o.a ac. ' � � � t' ��`' � :- � � � ��r ,� � , Preserve � � ��?'� .,�. �.+ ��;�-� �� '� i ur Plateau �;'rr y . n' :,,�'�,^' 4 �i'...r�, . ��I f�'; �`��;,� �=t i' � �. � t }� '°� .� �- .t�' * P��7 T:: '�.; ; - - -7 ^ • . � �r�� ,; T� �� b e' . y�, w �.. � � i , � � •1!.„, . ". � IY:i� Y>;:�31'!� � i ' . ' �.�� i; • �� ;, s-_. . . ' .` , # ,� f �"� �' �- . . f�J . _ ` ..�.,y-o.J'-`4r � .. . .,�'.;�'�.. ..g \�,--� , - .. L@ItCh `-:�� f ' i�'� 3. 162 aC i , I �,,,� � `rt, Mapiewood ' *` r--�.` Addition 11tA0.' ; " •.� � ' ..�f.,� _. . ' � � 1�� , hi _ o0_Saa `' •-- I ' � '_ ' � L.,:'_�_,._ .� Hudson Akers9 aarms - {I� ; �• , t 4.6 ac. _ �_�_ -�` ��j1 '� - ; � Falk il i � 1�*: }�1 � � � � � �"- 6.8 ac. � � �! f'� � � , /.�\ � 4. . . <. , . . � � .__..._ Anthone' - , 25J ac. . SE r�1�'Y y � a � • • \ . � �n m ' • ' • ' ' ' _ ��y ', UGB - G i�'� - � � ; I,sa ,oa ��l;;p� 1 4 a �',� ,�: D i x "i � / �� 1 s� �''''y� , � = j � (" � �>,,_ � �--•A�l� � , 7: �� p � � � � � • � Cp 1 S `72Qt ( _..r, 1-"`.� i � �..I � � � . � - `�: D .. D ' < y .,`� K � SE�36t� St � � • • - 'n SE 14 2nd 3't � �� • • —�—� SE t44l.hSt y � { � > :c ,� ..__ � � q m � � � � � � � 'y 3 Proposed Annexation Area . . . � - ... -. - - - - • - - � . Existing Conditions � PAA - Within Renton's PAA • Location—Generally area east of 156th Ave SE and south of SE 128�" St within Renton's East Plateau PAA, and a few properties west of 156t" Ave SE • Size - + 1,475 acres • Existing Use - ± 1,630 single-family dwellings • Boundaries— 2/3's of site is bordered by the Urban Growth Boundary . . ,��,� - �,-� i y. � ;_ 3. J � � 1 ''� er � ��,� `� P�M� ��T#f ''�. � _ h•. �f_'� � 4 Y r ��* �� [� f �� -�i ![ �'C'R�' 1 .,. �.� � �6 �_ ilj� �; . 'WY `f4 � ' N ' x �Yik» j .' : . �� { �-. �� '��r 1 b_�:r t�S: �`y�� a �^��r'!��#.�' � �T '�Rf P 1 ' �i► + e�1F�( � r'"' 'S�''y` Y ��a y,j � � .Y..�i'.R ' � ''�:*��'�� f � � �,w, � 4 �� ` y�s . +�h.x: � � Y. Y �:�' i+d�.� �� --��"M � ,� +-i �' � �� , � .��' Ta,s� C . '�F:aAa�t�� 4�f:i�i`�1�.-" +�-;� .��++i.� ', ..,�,.i; � 1- ..,� i� < �� 4�� _ _..t:� J..��..R �if�, ,.y�� }��,� t\#�A �"�'�� r�y�,�, �y�� 4��b ir ,e 'C�. � �" . �'�_.Yd ,�i"�".� • �qe[,i ' �F � � �.��Y� r Y }� � . �rw t :. � .4,� . ..' �,.�� y,�.{. 'l:.�� c_� `:�.a„--� r �� :. _�t 7,.�,-,��,�La� �~� ,��,�,. � $.�,3...�}} i *�" ,;�! a —•��'��tr,,, � �:��' , �� ;I.� �� r:• �'�« y�� x �� .r� �, ��+�'r��#:a S�it � y:h � ,,;a..' �,�', � z � �S��!;+ ;rwi .. ,� �i- �rs f-..� s.��O,�,�K R 1 '��,} ��Ra;��- , r ♦ ' i ��. �,�s4;� fr� .�,'�.�'^� � �+�{i��.��.t ,�_+�, �<. ��'y ±{ y r w, ' �� , i� �., � i +c : �.. �„: �/�'�'+�pR``s�.f;�y��,�e"�ry ��.,a�� '��„��• � �ia•,,_��,f� �. �"' �'0. 1. '�X" �t, �'� a �,.��. �-T fi �=,"` ��' .t'� i i .. � :� �. .� r�` '�;c ��¢*��,,��/,s'��q's r''7�r'+N'� ph�e.-�. �"'� �T. .,� ; �^3� �. !Y' �ar►;;'",� �r„` 'h'� L'.�".�,,�� !,' . R �'�.._ w;t � a�,..Y MFs ��r ii . � . � �� . .......�1 ,"".,�...... ,�.��''�^i"�.:L*•_�.,�,r�`�+�,'��M� .�3��.;�, Proposed Preserve Our Plateau Annexation ��e„a„�„Bo�„aa„ , n i Mav -- ne„�o�c�rv umm � UrMm Grwnn Boundary x ._ ,.�n n..�..n..d - - ' � � / 1 � . . '�.. y.�„'�✓ �...'� " ' ♦ ' . ..� • �!�`1. � ^ r ° y�.< <`� � R'F . i � i � � 'a"'�,r '� ,_ �� ,�� ¢ t+'J,'*,��g�� `� �x i1L`,'" . ` �;�;+ t _�_�� ..��,'�"-e�'.:�.�� .� ,, �� '� � � . _- � � � �� ,* ._, _ _ � i�: t � .1.,' � ��.�i � `;��`�r��..r,. w?' ''�=M- -- ,.. � . � _ -`:"""— — ------ :� �iru1 - ;� ,,,,�,�i 'F � =�r M r•' � �� v.• � .ChJ°a,�.� '. . � v�r :�'' r l��t . t � � t y �' ��`k �'� _�� i.� �� . , $ ,: �S � �� ,,��ar� ' �� '�,_ .. � � � , ,� .. . ... y„ �.�,w" , . '� _ � � �"'?�F`yl�� _ ' _ . �. :a �-'?s`'.:�r;� .- � �a..� _ . .,, � sc�.' a.� .. .i.�9 >..�..�. �..�.,� (R�"'�r, �> - '-� ��. _ . . �....w..�.,...rw�iYYW--:"'Y*f.w.. , � �� . I _ . � 6.. 5 , t , � �! � _ _ _ _ _ _`; _ � � ' ' " �� i e� � , � yM : � r = ,s `.. � - -- - ,`„ , $ � , V Y S S M:y.�c � k .W.S. � � . . .. v,.-�. I Y.VN A .,t ..� . I . �" ib& � ' � . . � �d � �._ :� � .. • + . 2:13v — � \ �� ..,.I 4 � .,'SMS� � \ T��\; I q�'�� "• f �v i' � ��. ..� .rri `. �. \ .. b q,.� x ``'e. � 1 � � T� Ff. 2 91N . r � � � � � .. . { t�.�x _. . � uCA51 �� ]I � �. � Y _ . ` II�M, t \ \ Y. � � — va 9 Z I�Sd 4 6 Y(hn� . � � � 1 a; �,.,a�, � , z „ � ix g. F�,m� s ' LAK : � I `��.a,.� � p. Y� =A. . '� ��.i� � �- .S 3 Knr s �i„ �-� \ .`F �7 � �' . .T.i�W�Si � �� . i _`�: �``T�y i� J ��/�'� ' /�---`-r -- �> ��``V� ��\-L'� _ --� i�".� ,A .,� / �� T.,r �� 6 � . Proposed Preserve Our Plateau Annexation ""^""'°"""' -- ftenlonGryLrtvt9 I H tl y AAap -- - Ur�an Growln BwmOary F Y b9 �t.. ._.. ... ......«. Svaem ' � Wellantl I >�. ' __ _ T__ � _ �T . s � .I � � t' �� 1�.� �F � � .o i .,�� a2� F ��.t�n � . �}�m� �'._� . � � _ L'� � _' . �p„��{,:y �T . . � � rp� ... . ( ��` h . { St.i _ _ _.i '�_ 'i.� Y� _� i . �. , � � .:-!"!� � L.-r' '; 5 �µ _a� �`1r. - , S 3>�� jr ��r��.� �n� �� f� (3,��=��5� � �>` s� .j.,, � ;,� � -.�- ' s i :.,. l �'��"� �^�C'3�� -: � - '- �t- �� P�� Sc k �. �sC` �- .,.� a4 I. �- � y '!v"' y. '4' I ., . .w r.� �'� x '�°• � �'i ,ta`� I . . � x� ?3-i �'� k ,� - �� "- 8 . �!w 7�{.K � �.. N 1 � , '�`ro+°` . �� ay`,�v .F s Y. Q� . 5 : . _- .` s �REs � t _ . 4 �� . .q��,.''��1 a.,. � MMt �. .... i � t . `"_ � .. ��'�3 d 5��} �. I 1 `� � �i . � _ �.. �`c., �_�--�; ,r : .. __, . �' . ..1 � �/--�- — '1 ,., . w 1 5 i ' , ��f ' �-�,� '�. ..�� J---�`-F_..___—�" .-�,.s..�.___y��, i . , . . _. �.'' L-�'._^�-�:�_'-iJ,,.�.�,�,�J� , -y- . : 4 � � �� _ r , _ ._. �_ t , _ . . _ w _ . :�=.: `�.:,� -t ,�._ Proposed Preserve Our Plateau Annexation Anne�afionArea � 7opog aphy MaD -- Renlon C ry Limils �,•, ... �•••,A •..��• Ufl CwNouow�h BoundarY I 6 � S : � � j �. _....... �E. .... MFIACAES'. . EJlISI.UNIfS MEIM�UW"5". + ' 1 - . . . I - . ..t+,a - � �oe - } �- 6. s ; . I #k�; F^ ' ca�� u�. ;a �a - --a..�-,J - T6'AIS� 216 9a 105C �` � � ` � � r. �` ' C , '.. — _ .,,.. 4 4.� x� .. �4 l�,t }. . Y...• _ .. �.i e xi; — . .hJ R t R`��5� ' 5 ,s . .�m Y � i�.„ � �-.� s _ y { � � � ' t Existing Dwellings = 1,600 � - �� : - � s ,, : �� , . ,,. �, r , „ , . ,.:, . .,, 1 ., �'� �r-�. �` ' ,�F,.r �'�--Y �� .. � � 1 • . .... X i � , • � � � ��. 9� ,. - .. . . � -__ ��` , ., � .. ... , ,. Proposed Preserve Our PlateauFAnnexation —,,,��a,R, I , � -- Rer� i.rty un'vK '. '�, A��f��) ..,.:� .... .... - - -��rb •e.vfM B.-�.'n.Cary ��. rte.5' _ �i. . ' / � • � ' � � / � � � , ��__. . ., .. .:p .. __ -� � ... _ - / I • - � � - F`� ..� �� .�._ � �� i i. ' , ' _ _- [tt ,.s �. -"=�'3i wlf Z='� �I - �:� � —' — �t��+ � -� � b�� _- ORI , � �� —'.l "r �-� �l i• � � � � � ��w�y r � , �� , � — _��. � Y��r��.� • i / , ��F�t�' ��f�E' �J- ; a __ '=� W < L�L�J� �I.��i��tF�'�"{. � � ' � . � :1 � Q��R �'�j��t � � �,,,�� _ . . � /J` � �'�`.; i I � _. s �� . � �• � , I — �•� � L�, 'I_ � h�,�. � ;� � � ( 1 i � i 1 � �1 '1 ,��Y � �� Yx��a �- � . ��.�'.�y�� _�<Y��YN � I.�/ "�`� �(1��.. 7 King County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation � _: . '� _ , __ _--__ �- - , ; � ; � "� 1 �� ..; ,� �)�. King County desi�,mates most of East Renton Plateau Urban Residential,medium,4-12 du/ac Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation — 1995-2004 � . �� = �� ' � �'�'� � �� __ i� : ,`�1��.�� , ��, ,�� ■ � � �'� � � In 1995 Renton Council designated much of East Renton Plateau Residential Single Family(RS), allows ma�c. 8 du/ac Renton Com rehensive Plan p Land Use Designation - 2004 In 2003 Planning staff inet with residents of the East Renton Plateau to discuss their vision for this area � This led to shared vision that would s�ee future development more in character with existing development patterns including: larger single-family lots, deeper front yards, increased side yard set backs, � retention of portions of existing treed areas, and � articulated dwelling fa�ades In November 2004 Renton amended its Comp Plan Land Use Map changing the land use designation for this area from RS (max. 8 du/net ac), to RLD (max. 4 du/net ac) Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation - 2004 ��:�� r� ��■ ,,o�� r. :_ � _ ,� � � � . - ; � :� ,� a��.�i� �� ■ � �� 111 "` i �► � In November 2004 Council redesignated most of East Renton � Plateau Residential Low Density(RLD),maximum 4 du/ac. 0 � �.��' a :- . � -_ j � : � ,k� , �� , ;a •: '# � "`� �� , .-,.,. + � ; 4 ,..y�:�.,� ...�..va«�- `., �t N'� � .- •�. _ �.. . ... . ��. 9 :i . .��'. , �.��+�1` . �-� . 4��'�� . � 1j f• �e.�l. � _ '�� - ' -.� `� t 'k`.. �` "``�:,.., ;7�E.. i tP`?' .i.� � ! .r � `+ �'„�-; , �� r '•�.� � - -�-�'�`^"�ir.+::�il�...�.�"."�-" . .. .. ..� ''� ��. ` `� ' �y`��` �/ - '/�' � I 3�' �r''7 z��`�-«:� .�y�!"- � � I .� .�,r'.� . .t '�$°.��.°{:':+;� '�V'-�, ` i �� . . , . �.:— .r � . � . ' . ,, .. . � ,�,�".'r—, .. .,,. \"�,s�. �� a�y�`� y� : �.: 4 \ is .,,,�w.'�.!{ —P f ��c�•7� � fx+F � . "� �, � w+�'t�, '� -T.�s�(wia� ',i� ro�+�'��,� � � ,y ,t:� • ,�. �� ,.� ' ,t,y,t'•y,._ ,ir' : �ii Il' �. ... - . ,��y .y� .J l �Y@;' K.+k�' _ i � � � ; � '� a,�y� 't'` �� ,. . � ` �^7 ` ' 1 y�i �t� t � ' ~ 1 .. ' �� I �. . � � �.�� Jz � . . .. � g yT � . � _ � � �_ y7 �'�'r�. t'� � � _'�. ' - " _ ;K.�� .�`'�•, � `� ,��'�� _ \ ;�,,,��_'�_'III �S�tJ4...;i��'��; t ... V W.h.:�Sc `��.z� �s� i. � - � -� .`:=,� �°� - �.}',� _.. �` ;,i�k�''tt��r d�., � . . .-� �7 _ � �� . . . � �j� _.._.�'"'.4S',�'�.`_'. L,� t��',� .,� � . ;;�, ��..��' j — ., �`` �� ' � ' - �'�`"� _ ',.�. ,^,..�0-s` � F�r��. �� .. — t� � � � • �"�"�,1 � � r.-. � -� � � � - - -- � , , � �'r, " 'J j . �'st-]rzx�e-_Y : -r��r++,.`+- � a F i �1 ..R ''.}."" , ' • . �.� ' `+�.� ��,.t . � Existing Conditions - Public, Services Fire- 95% Fire District 25 --- � and 5% Fire District 10 �, - �� _�. s��; a�) � Utilities _ . - Within Water District 90 Service Area r�.., - Within Renton Sewer � . �!� Ser.vice Area Schools • ' ' -- Within Renton and • Issaquah School Districts ' -�N=� • � � � � . . ► . � � � . . � � � � _ � . U -�'' '� ��., ,�,4�;, ___:��____ , + :� t.: - �_` � �}� ,� �� Se� 1 � t y `'�ea w�� ■�■ p � ,: ��„a: �€� - ��a � ` ^ - ��c ¢ , �,.�s�+�+� :•' :y, . ,'�i:.�' . � .�� "`+,, �-�. *_.,� .�.�;p�*r..-�°,'� � �r" r'`�,'i�' ya: �";�!`�, .+e�� $e .., i: • � � . s..�X., ��,y,�': �'�, � s,- ,�-�" '. ,�� , . � + ' > `�' r�p„ `si ti�,, a� r �:� �, f� i � � � ��. , � �. _� ,�` ,��<: � � � ��k,� � _ '� .��, ,� s! ,�,�+s .r �� ~. � � 4 ,� '� ,. k��'�,` ,.. � _a . , , ;, ,� � � .��;z �e, �.„�` ti�� r� ' r �;r. "r,' �'.� 5;,,�' .'' "►'A"t ti,��+ ... I �� r; �v ,y� *: �� ..,'��n��. ��,tx�`i ��,� K �r�` �. . ' �:��u�► "• `� I N � �� t '; 4 I' . w- a'. :( y.w,� Y�y 6._ ��.. . ! d .� i 'i � ��i lu * � s�'��':` . � � . , � � �.., � __.._ . _ , _ ; .� _ .q ; ,:'Y,�. z 4i: � .. � � I .�E S � ' 1 ' •i �i 1 ' t� 1 '..r,:' : . .:.�4��....:.� r:.. ," -� �._. . . . . 5: 12 Compliance with Countywide Planning Policies FW-4 All jurisdictions shall Renton has developed protect and enhance the natural comprehensive plans,policies ecosystems through comprehensive �development regulations to plans,policies, and development p�tect enviromnentally regulations sensitive areas and features. � FW—12 The Urban Growth Area The 1,475-acre site is within the ; shall provide enough land to Urban Growth Area atxi can accommodate future urban accommodate an estimated i,06D development new struc�ures and 3,657 p�sons LU-2b The lands within the UGA Renton amended its C,omp Plan shall be characterized by urban on November 2004 to show low development density residential at 4 du/ac thro.ughout this area Compliance with Count�,�wide Planning Policies, continued LU-29 Cites shall develop It is unlikely that Renton will � growth phasing plans consistent provide sewer service to the vv�th apphcable capital facilities azea east of Liberty High School I plans to maintain an Urban Area in the next six years. As a served with adequate public consequence this area is likely facilities to meet six-year to be zoned at a lower density intennediate household and until sewers can be provided. employment target ranges. LU-30 Where urban services are Lower density 2oning in eastern not provided within 10 years, third of proposed annexation cities sha11 develop policies and site would reduce need for �I regulations to phase and limit urban services to this area in the '� development so that planning and immediate future while creating infrastructure decisions support a transition to the surrounding future development when servi rural area on the other side of become available the UGB Compliance with BRB Objectives The 1,475 acre annexation area is within Renton's PAA and complies with relevant � Boundary Review Board objectives: — It has reasonable boundaries ' — It preserves natural neighborhoods and / ,� communities, � '� f — It creates and preserves logical service areas, and — It provides for annexation of unincorporated areas that are urban in character M�ui�icati�ns mig_h.� ;esult �n mor� lugical sF:;rvicf� are<<s bui redu��e Iikelih�od of pas�age � Fiscal Analysis for East Renton Plateau* ' *2,091 Acres, 7,287 Residents v�1,475 Acres,5,520 Residents Onerating Revenues** Qperating Costs** P`r'°�'T� �2�260,0� Police Services $738,000 Gambling Tax $ 0 Fire Services $908,000 Utility Tax $ 620,000 PBPWs $962,000 State Shared Rev. $ 245,000 Comm. Serv.s $617,000 Sales Tax $ 157,OOQ '� Ad.,Judic., Legal $177,000 Sls Tax-Crim/Jus $ 146,000 Finance& Info $112,000 Fines&Forfeits $ 74,000 Hum. Resources $ 24,000 Recreation Fees $ 54,000 Econ. velo . 7 000 De $ , P . Legislative $ 4,�0 P�rt Fees $ 210,000 Staff Fac. Costs 147 000 Cable Fran. Fees $ 62,000 TOTAL COST 53,696,000 Bus. Lics. Fees $ 2,60Q 2006 Net Fiscal Impact* TOTAL REV. 53,830,600 $134.6000 **Source: Berk&Associates � King County Annexation Initiative • In 2004, King County's new Annexation Initiative: — calling for the annexation by 2012 of most of the County's remaining unincorporated urban areas — stating it can no longer afford to provide urban services to these areas • East Renton Plateau Offer: $1.75 M ($1.15 M REET, $600 K CX) with %2 payable upon successful election and 'h upon effectuation of annexation. Can be used for: — Parks and stormwater propetty transfer — Potential hiring County employees — Development Standards • Offer does not increase with expansion, however reduction in area reduces amount City would receive 2006 Le islative Incentive � g ' i • Applies to annexations in cities having less than 440,000 population and count�es having less than 600,000 population • Cities can impose a salzs and use tax in addition to other taxes it is authoriz+ed under state law to collect • Program provides credit to cities against state � taxes at rate of 0.1% for areas ��th populations greater than 10,000 and less than 2�,000, and 0.2% for annexed areas with populatio,: greater � than 20,000 ; , 500�1.�p 'suo��vxauu�fo 7.�vdru//v�s�,� 's�ln�.�o.,sb'�'.y.r�g :a�.tnoS* �as� siq�.�o�.�apino�d a�in.�as aq� �uicuo�aq pue nnou dn�u��s apnj�ui sai�uai�� — q��a sas�� 0£ �� OZ 3o suo��xauuE IEauia�id.zaii�cus u�inn pazij�a.z aq �ou pinonn ��q� atut�auo�E ui �a.tE �ui�uuq 3o sai�uai��a.zof�y� . *StOZ �q uoitti� £Z'I$ o� �uisEa.��ui SOOZ ui 000`Ofi I$�� snjdins anvana.� � a�Edi�i�u� pino� uo�ua� �I��c�iuI �, saa�olduza j�uoi�ipp� I£ �uuiy sa��dt�i�u� ��i� `dyd nEa�Ejd�uo�ua� �s�g ajounn aq�.�o� a�inaas3o Ianai �va.un� s�uo�ua� aansua o�aapao uI i suoT��1IdLuI ' uot�.�xauu� n�a��jd uo�ua� �s�� . _ s�e�s �i� �.�a�� s.��a�C pj .�o� s�s�j ui�.��o.�d . OiOZ `i ��nu�r�� asou�io �00`O I �o �a.��o uot��xauu� pa�uawT.uo� an�q �snuz s�i�t� 'LOOZ `i �Inr ani��a��a u��o.zd . •a��s o� o� sasnid.�ns •anTa�a.� asinn.�at�o pinonn �i s�nvana.� I�.�ai�a� puE sa�inaas � jgdi�ivntu apino.�d o� s;�a� s��i� uaann�aq a�ua.�a��ip dn a�u� �iuo uz� �a��ajio�sanuana� . �a.�� uoi��exauue aq�lo� sa�inaas jEdi�iunw a��ado pU�e `ui��ui�cu `apino.�d � o��Clajo� pasn aq �snu� pa��ai�o� san�:ana� . i 9899 SSS — anl�.ua�uI anl��jst�a� 900Z ; . Annexation Implications, continued I — Sales tax rP�enue credit� of ��p to 0.2% for l0 � y:ars beginni��g in 20C'7 due tc passage �SB 66�d, and — Controlling new development under Renton's zoning and development regulations rather than those of the County • Renton is recommending that the proposition of whether voters favor annexation or not be plac� on the ba�llot for a fall or spring election Future Zoning In passing its resolution Renton's City ' Council decided not to place the proposition of future zoning within the 1,475 acre annexation area before the voters at this time — In 2004 Renton amended its Comp Plan, changing land use designation for most of East Renton Plateau PAA from Residential Single Family (RS), which allowed 8 du/net acre,to Residential Low Density (RLD), which allows maximum of 4 du/net acre, and Future Zoning, continued — Because area has not yet been prezoned City believes it is premature to put zoning issue on ballot at this time, — City prefers to hold two or more public hearings on rezoning when it will be able to present sub-area recommendations consistent with the Residential Low Density designation Outstanding Indebtedness The Renton City Council decided not to place proposition of whether voters wished to assume their proportionate share of City's voted outstanding indebtedness on the ballot because: — A super majority would be required to pass it — Those voting must be equal or greater than 40% of those voting in last general election — City's outstanding indebtedness is near retirement Information Issues • How will the annexation affect Fire District 25? - The p�posetl annexation would remove 51%of the current as.cessed valuation of District 25. Because this is less than 90�1�,the District will continue to exist but Rent�will �rovide se�vice to the annexation area. • What efforts will be taken to create an orderlv transition between county and municipal government? . , � The City and King County are currently discussing ' ' interlocal agreements regarding the transference of: - County owned facilities for parklands and�ce water treatment facilities ,; :�y.;�, - County Services such as police,m�d m�i�,,,��'�;� and development permitting. Information Issues, continued • Will annexation timing affect the existing sewer moratorium? The exist�ng sewer moratorium is scheduled to expire in December,having been extended for another six months. If elecdon not held unti12007 - tions include extendin the moratorium for another OP g few months, or - Letting it expire and continuing to issue permits base�i on Renton's Comp Plan RLD land use designation Without sewer moratorium development occurring during interim would develop to County standards ' Information Issues, continued • If this annexation by election fails, what is likelv to happen to the area in the near term? - As the designated sewer service provid�'fa this�t�R€.; : Ci y has already issued sewer c�ti��pt'�'."' �� in the area. _� �, �'_� - The exisring sewer moratonum will be lifl;od and new certificates issued based upon the City's RLD Comp Plan lazid use designation,or 4 du/net acre - Subsequent annexations likely to be inereme.ntal acA�!tess than 50.acres in area - Until annexation occurs firture devel�m enf will� . under King County development regulations - Based upon County statements the existing level of servic� will conrinue to decline Conclusion • The proposed Preserve Our Plateau Annexation is: —Generally consistent with Renton's Comp Plan annexation and low density single- family policies — Generally consistent with relevant Countywide Planning Policies —Generally consistent with Boundary Review Board Objectives � Conclusion, continued Therefore, the Citv of Renton respectfully rec�uests that the Boundary Review Board support Renton's resolution callin�for an election, by: • endorsing the Preserve Our Plateau Annexation, as proposed, and • supporting the City's resolution calling for an election, with the only item on the ballot being the proposition of whether voters support or do not support annexing the 1,475 acre POPA are� at this time � � ^ , � .� .� � �ti`�Y o� CITY OF RENTON �: Economic Development,Neighborhoods and * ,� � Strategic Planning �� O� Kathy Keolker,Mayor Alex Pietsch,Administrator N May 22,2006 State of Washington Boundary Review Board for King County Yesler Building, Suite 402 400 Yesler Way � Seattle,WA 98104 Subject: BRIEF SUPPORTING N�TICE OF INTENTION TO EXPAND THE CITY OF RENTON CORPORATE LIMITS BY ANNEXATION Dear Board Members: As required by Chapter 36.93 of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW), the City of Renton gave notice of its intention to annex territory referred to as the "Preserve Our Plateau Annexation." That annexation is proposed under the election method in accordance with the applicable provisions of Chapter 35A.14 of the RCW and would incorporate into the City of Renton approximately 1,475 acres of territory for the provision of urban services. To assist in your consideration of the proposed action,staffhas prepared the attached brief. Should questions arise during the review of this information please contact Don Erickson, Senior Planner, at(425)430-6581. Also,please send notices and other communications regarding the proposed annexation to: Don Erickson,AICP; Senior Planner Department of Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Alex Pietsch Administrator 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N AHEAD OF THE CURVE �rr,�<.,a.,A.n,.,ra��<Fn�i�An,��,.,:,ra�ai�ni�.,�rn,t,��mF� REPORT TO WASHINGTON STATE BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD FOR KING COUNTY IN THE MATTER OF THE CITY OF RENTON'S PRESERVE OUR PLATEAU ANNEXATION Boundary Review Board File No. 2231 June 14,2006 Public Hearing 1. REQUEST The City of Renton respectfully requests that the Washington State Boundary Review Board for King County hold a public hearing in order that residents of the proposed annexation area can be heard and boundaries for the proposed annexation confirmed before this annexation is placed on the ballot. The City of Renton is hopeful that after careful review the Board will be able to support this annexation. II. BACKGROUND AND FACTS The City received a 10% Notice of Intent to Commence Annexation Proceedings petition for approximately 1,475-acres in November 2005 (Figure 1, Vicinity Map). This petition requested that the Renton City Council hold a public meeting with the annexation proponents to decide whether to accept or reject the proposed annexation, whether to require simultaneous adoption of new zoning, whether to require the assumption of a proportional share of the City's outstanding indebtedness, and whether to adopt a resolution to approve the proposed annexation and call for an election or reject the proposed annexation. King County Elections and Records certified the 10% Notice of Intent petition, submitted with more than 390 signatures of registered voters on December 19,2005. On February 13, 2006, the Renton City Council held a public meeting on the proposed annexation and passed a resolution accepting the proposed annexation and calling for an election in the fall of 2006. Neither the adoption of simultaneous zoning or assumption of bonded indebtedness were required to be placed on the ballot asking voters whether they support or do not support annexation to the City of Renton. The Council agreed to call for an election and pay for the costs of such an election. III. CONSISTENCY WITH APPLICABLE OBJECTIVES OF THE BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD City Council and City staff have analyzed the proposed 1,475-acre annexation in light of Boundary Review Board criteria and found that it generally meets both the policy intent and criteria the Board must implement. Pursuant to RCW 36.93.180, the Board, in making its decision, shall attempt to achieve the following relevant objectives: 1. Preservation of natural neighborhoods and communities. Annexation of the Preserve Our Plateau Annexation will preserve existing natural neighborhoods, since virtually all of the East Renton Plateau PAA is included within the annexation site. The exceptions are the Eastwood Park, Maplewood Heights Addition, Cedar River Bluff, Maple Ridge and Briar Hills neighborhoods on the ridge above the Maplewood Golf Course and Ron Regis Park to the south. Because many of Preserve Our Plateau Annexation 2 V BRB File No.2231 these neighborhoods were developed with dry sewers in the streets, many residents are under the misconception that they would be required to connect to sewer if they came into the City of Renton. 2. Preservation of physical boundaries, including, but not limited to, bodies of water,highways,and land contours. The Preserve Our Plateau Annexation Annexation, as proposed, uses physical boundaries that include the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) for over 65% of its perimeter. The UGB was established by King County in consultation with those cities whose PAAs it helps to create. The southern boundary of the UGB, in this area, is defined to a large extent by the topography along the edge of the Cedar River Valley. In this case, the UGB follows the top of the steep slopes framing the valley floor below. The eastern, and most of the northern, boundaries of the proposed annexation site are also conternunous with the East Renton Plateau UGB. In this latter case, the boundary is determined primarily by existing streets such as 184`h Avenue SE, SE 132°d Street, and SE 128�` Street. The western boundary of the proposed annexation site follows the Renton City boundary for that portion north of SE 136�h Street and west of 156`h Avenue SE and the edges of existing subdivisions such as Briar Ridge, Maplewood Heights,and Maple Ridge, south of SE 138`�'Place. 3. Creation and preservation of logical service areas. Eighty-five percent of the proposed annexation site is located within the Issaquah School District. Only the western 15% is located within the Renton School District. School district boundaries, however, do not change as a result of annexation. The entire 1,475-acre annexation site is located within Water District 90's service area and the City of Renton is the designated sewer service provider for the area. Fire service is currently provided by Fire District No. 10 and Fire District No. 25. Fire District No. 25 serves 95% of the annexation site and Fire District No. 10 serves the other 5%. The City of Renton, under contract, provides fire services to residents and businesses within Fire District No. 25. If the subject annexation is successful, Renton's Fire Department will take over service from these two districts. Consolidating fire services under one district will create a more logical fire service area. 4. Discouragement of multiple incorporations of small cites and encouragement of incorporation of cities in excess of ten thousand population in heavily populated urban areas. The previously proposed Briarwood Incorporation, a portion of which was in the subject annexation area, failed in the 1990s. Also, because the area's estimated population is less than 10,000, and has a very limited commercial tax base, incorporation is not a feasible alternative. Annexation to the City of Renton, within whose PAA the annexation site is located, will ensure that it receives a high level of urban services at or below what residents are now paying for these services. 6. Dissolution of inactive special purpose districts. Not applicable. There are no inactive special purpose districts within the Preserve Our Plateau Annexation area or its proposed expansion areas. H:\EDNSP�PAA�Annexations�Preserve Our Plateau\BRB Brie£doc\cor Preserve Our Plateau Annexation 3 BRB File No.2231 7. Adjustment of impractical6oundaries. Not applicable. The proposed 1,475-acre POPA is not being proposed to adjust impractical boundaries. 8. Incorporation as cities or towns or annexation to cities or towns of unincorporated areas,which are urban in character. Although the subject area is marginally urban in character, because of its larger lot sizes, all the area is designated urban and is located within Renton's designated Potential Annexation Area. The area under consideration has two options; either remain in unincorporated King County and see its level of service continue to decline or annex to the City of Renton, with its much higher level of service. King County currently spends an estimated $195 per person for urban type services in unincorporated King County versus Renton, which spends an estimated $3,020 per person. As a result, Renton residents receive a much higher level of service per their tax dollar. 9. Protection of agriculture and rural lands which are designed for long term productive agriculture and resource use by a comprehensive plan adopted by the county legislative authority. Not applicable. The 1,475-acre annexation site is not designated on the King County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map as Agriculture. The entire annexation site is located within the Urban Growth Boundary, so only properties on the rural side of the Urban Growth Area boundary are designated Agriculture. IV. DECISIONS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT(RCW 36.93.157) County planning under the Growth Management Act (GMA) relates to this proposal in that King County views the subject annexation area as urban and has adopted maps that place it with Renton's Urban Growth Area and its Potential Annexation Area (PAA). Renton's proposed R-4, 4-du/net acre zoning achieves urban densities consistent with GMA. V. ANNEXATION TO BE CONSISTENT WITH COUNTYWIDE PLANNING POLICIES RCW 36.93.157 requires the Boundary Review Board to comply with the Countywide Planning Policies. Relevant Countywide Planning Policies and the City's response to them follow: Policv CA-7. Adjacent jurisdictions shall identify and protect habitat networks that are aligned at jurisdictional boundaries. Networks shall link large protected or significant blocks of habitat within and between jurisdictions to achieve a continuous countywide network. These networks shall be mapped and displayed in comprehensive plans. King County and Renton have worked together to protect the area east of the Maplewood Golf Course as a Greenbelt/Urban Separator. Renton's Comprehensive Plan designates the Preserve Our Plateau Annexation area Residential Low Density. This designation allows a maximum of four dwelling units per net acre and includes H:�EDNSP�PAA\Annexations�Preserve Our Plateau\BRB Brie£doc\cor Preserve Our Plateau Annexation 4 � BRB File No.2231 provisions to promote clustering of new dwellings in this zone, further enhancing open space habitat. Policv CA-10. Jurisdictions shall maintain or enhance water quality through control of runoff and best management practices to maintain natural aquatic communities and beneficial uses. Renton has adopted the Cedar River Basin Plan, which recommends solving problems at their source, and suggests land use prescriptions and development restrictions. The Plan also often imposes, at the project level, in sensitive areas subject to erosion and flooding Level 3 Flow Control Standards from the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual. Policy LU-27. Urban separators are low-density areas or areas of little development within the Urban Growth Area. Urban separators shall be defined as permanent low- density lands, which protect adjacent resource lands, Rural Areas, and environmentally sensitive areas and create open space corridors within and between Urban Areas, which provide environmental, visual, recreational and wildlife benefits. As noted above, Renton has designated the subject annexation site Residential Low Density on its Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. It is likely that, with the possible exception of the area east of 175"' Avenue SE, most of the area would be zoned R-4, four units per net area, upon annexation to the City of Renton. Portions of the more environmentally sensitive area east of 175"'Avenue SE, with its four creeks and larger lots, is more likely to be zoned R-1, one unit per net acre. Such zoning is much less dense than what the County currently envisions for the area and will do more to preserve its existing character, including providing environmental, visual, and wildlife benefits. Policy LU-31. In collaboration with adjacent counties and cities and King County, and in consultation with residential groups in affected areas, each city shall designate a potential annexation area. Each potential annexation area shall be specific to each ciry. Potential annexation areas shall not overlap. The subject expanded annexation site is part of Renton's designated East Renton Plateau Potential Annexation Area. Renton's PAA does not overlap that of any adjacent jurisdiction at this time and is shown on Renton's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The subject annexation comprises much of Renton's East Renton Plateau PAA, extending out to the edge of the Urban Growth Boundary. Policv LU-32. A city may annex territory only within its designated potential annexation area. All cities shall phase annexations to coincide with the ability for the city to coordinate the provision of a full range of urban services to areas annexed. The Preserve Our Plateau Annexation area is located completely within Renton's East Renton Plateau PAA and Renton is prepared to provide a full range of urban services to this area including police, fire, sewer, surface water management, and local governance, to mention a few. Policv CC-6. A regional open space system shall be established to include lands which: H:\EDNSP�PAA\Annexations�Preserve Our Plateau\BRB Brie£doc\cor Preserve Our Plateau Annexation 5 BRB File No.2231 a) Provide physical and/or visual buffers such as open spaces, which help to separate incompatible uses, distinguish the Urban and Rural Areas, define Urban Growth Boundaries, or establish the character of a neighborhood, community, cit, or region. The proposed Preserve Our Plateau Annexation site is designated primarily as Urban Residential, 4-12 du/ac, on King County's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and as Residential Low Density on the Renton's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. Renton is proposing lower density R-4, 4 du/net, acre zoning for this area. King County's current R-4 zoning is different from what Renton is proposing in that it allows bonuses, which can increase densities up to 6 units per gross acre. At these densities, lots are much smaller and there is little likelihood of retaining large amounts of existing vegetation on site. Renton's proposed zoning will allow this area to retain much of its existing lower density character, functioning more as a transition area between the lower density uses on the rural side of the UGB and Renton's higher density R-8 urban areas west of 144`�'Avenue SE. Both Renton and King County have set aside the area between the Renton - Maple Valley Highway, on the south, and the hillside along the north side of the Cedar River as a lower density corridor, which functions as an urban separator. b) Provide active and passive outdoor recreational opportunities, which are compatible with the environmental and ecological values of the site; The proposed 1,475-acre annexation site includes more than 57-acres of County owned parklands,which would be taken over by the City of Renton upon annexation. Most of these areas are currently unimproved or underdeveloped. The City would move ahead to develop these parklands so that they can provide both active and passive outdoor recreational opportunities for residents. Unlike King County, which spends less than $25 per capita for parks and recreation services,� the City of Renton spends an estimated$315 per capita for parks and recreation services.Z VI. The Annexation is Consistent with the King County Comprehensive Plan. King County views the 1,475-acre Preserve Our Plateau Annexation and other areas within the Urban Growth Area boundary as urban and has adopted maps that place it within Renton's designated Potential Annexation Area. Below is a listing of relevant County Comprehensive Plan policies related to annexations: Policv U-204. King County shall support annexation proposals that are consistent with Countywide Planning Policies and the Washington State Growth Management Act, and when the area proposed for annexation is wholly within the annexing city's officially adopted PAA, and is not part of a contested area. The subject annexation site and its possible expansion is consistent with Countywide Planning Policies (below) and the Growth Management Act, and is not part of a contested area being within Renton's officially adopted Potential Annexation Area. �2006 Regional Government Transition,Annexation Initiative and 2006 Adopted Regional/Local Unincorporated Budget Allocation,King County,2006 Z Investing in Renton's Future,2006 Budget Detail,City of Renton,2006 H:�EDNSPU'AA\AnnexationsU'reserve Our Plateau�BRB Brie£doc\cor Preserve Our Plateau Annexation 6 BRB File No.2231 Policy U-205. King County shall not support annexation proposals that would.• 1) Result in illogical service areas; The current proposal does not create illogical service areas since, if successful, it would bring a large piece of unincorporated King County into the City. County roads surfacing and maintenance would be taken over by the City, as would local policing. The City of Renton currently provides fire service under contract to most of the area and annexation will consolidate this under one agency, rather than two. Water and school district boundaries would not change as a result of this annexation. 2) Create unincorporated islands unless the annexation is preceded by an interlocal agreement in which the ciry agrees to pursue annexation of the remaining island area in a timely manner; Although an unincorporated island will result, it is much smaller than the current unincorporated peninsula between Renton and the Urban Growth Boundary. Also, Renton has been actively pursuing annexations in the remaining portions of its East Renton Plateau PAA that are not included in the POPA. 3) Focus solely on areas that would provide a distinct economic gain for the annexing city at the exclusion of other proximate areas that should logically be included; Not applicable. No areas were excluded based upon their assessed value. If anything, just the opposite is true. Some areas with higher property assessments were not included in this proposed annexation, by its proponents, because initial surveys indicated that residents of those areas did not favor annexation at this time. 4) Move designated Agricultural and/or Forest Production District lands into the Urban Growth Area; or Not applicable. S) Apply zoning to maintain or create permanent, low-density residential areas, unless such areas are part of an urban separator or are environmentally constrained, rendering higher densities inappropriate. Renton in 2004 amended its Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change the land use designation for much of its East Renton Plateau PAA from Residential Single to Residential Low Density. This was done after the City held meetings with residents and to better reflect the existing character of the area and its more environmentally constrained portions, particularly east of 175`h Avenue SE. Renton has achieved most of its established growth targets by providing higher density housing in its downtown and, in the East Renton Plateau PAA, west of 144`�`Avenue SE. Policv U-301. King County should work with cities to focus countywide growth within their boundaries and should support annexations within the Urban Growth Area when consistent with the King County Comprehensive Plan and Countywide Planning Policies. As noted above, the proposed 1,475-acre Preserve Our Plateau Annexation is consistent with relevant Countywide Planning Policies and the King County Comprehensive Plan. H:\EDNSP�PAA\Annexations�Preserve Our Plateau�BRB Brie£doc\cor Preserve Our Plateau Annexation 7 BRB File No.2231 Policv U-304. King County should support annexation proposals when: a. The proposal is consistent with the King Counry Comprehensive Plan; b. The proposed area is wholly within the Urban Growth Area and within the city's designated Potential Annexation Area(for annexations); c. The City is planning for urban densities and e�cient land use patterns consistent with the Countywide Planning Policies and King Counry land use plans; and, d. Adopted Countywide goals and policies for urban services, environmental and cultural resources protection will be supported. The proposed annexation by election is generally consistent with the King County Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map. The area proposed for annexation is wholly within the Urban Growth Area as shown on the King County Comprehensive Plan and within Renton's designated PAA. The City's Comprehensive Plan policies and development regulations support countywide goals and policies for urban densities, urban services, and environmental and cultural resource protection. If this annexation by election is successful,the most likely zoning for most of the area will be R-4, which allows a maximum of four units per net acre. The more environmentally sensitive areas east of 175"'Avenue SE could be zoned R-1, which allows one unit per net acre. As noted above, the proposed zoning will achieve urban densities and efficiencies consistent with the adopted countywide goals and policies for urban services. VII. The Annexation is Consistent with Relevant King County Ordinances and Plans: a. King Countv Code 13.24, Sewer/Water Comprehensive Plan. King County's Sewer/Water Comprehensive Plan designates the City of Renton as the designated sewer service provider for the 1,475-acre Preserve Our Plateau Annexation area. Ordinance 13708 adopted on January 9, 2000 approved Renton's Long Range Wastewater Management Plan, which includes providing service to the subject annexation site. Water District 90 is the designated water service provider for the entire annexation area. As a result, there is no anticipated change in terms of sewer or water service from the proposed annexation. b. Kin�Countv Ordinance 15051§157 Critical Areas. Pursuant to the state Growth Management Act, the County has adopted development regulations that protect the functions and values of critical areas, including wetland, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, critical groundwater recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, and geographical hazardous areas. King County's Comprehensive Plan policies call for a mixture of regulations and incentives to be used to protect the natural environment and manage water resources. Regulatory approaches include low-density zoning in environmentally constrained areas, limits on impervious surface, stormwater controls,and clearing and grading regulations. RCW 36.70A.172 requires local governments to include best available science in developing policies and development regulations to protect the functions and values of critical areas, and to give special consideration to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries. The City of Renton's Critical Areas Ordinance (RMC 4-3-050) describes pernutted and prohibited activities and uses, waivers,modifications and variances, and additional criteria and pernut processes H:\EDNSP�PAA\Annexations�Preserve Our Plateau\BRB Brief.doc\cor Preserve Our Plateau Annexation 8 � BRB File No.2231 for development in critical area. Critical areas regulated by the City's ordinance include aquifer recharge areas, flood and geologic hazard areas, native habitat and wetlands. Although specific regulations vary, they are comparable to the County's Critical Areas Ordinance. VII. CONCLUSION The proposed 1,475-acre Preserve Our Plateau Annexation appears to be consistent with all relevant objectives and criteria and should therefore be supported. These objectives and criteria include the Boundary Review Board Objectives (RCW 36.93.180), the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.93.157), the Countywide Planning Policies, the King County Comprehensive Plan, and relevant County utility plans and ordinances. In addition, the City of Renton is ready to assume this area and provide a high level of urban services to its residents and businesses. The proposed 1,475-acre annexation is designated "urban" and both the Growth Management Act and the Countywide Planning Policies designate cities, such as Renton, as the logical providers of urban services to these areas. It also appears that annexation to Renton would reduce the amount of taxes and service fees paid by most residents within the annexation site even though the City of Renton provides a much higher level of service to its residents than the County does to residents with its unincorporated areas. Renton is able to do this because of its considerable tax base. State law (RCW 36.93.160) authorizes the Boundary Review Board to: approve the annexation proposal as submitted, deny the annexation proposal as submitted, or modify the annexation proposal by adding or deleting territory and approving as modified. The City of Renton is requesting that the Board approve the annexation proposal as submitted. H:�EDNSP�PAA\Annexations�Preserve Our Plateau\BRB Brief.doc\cor CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: May 25, 2006 TO: Don Erickson � FROM: Sonja J. Fesser� SUBJECT: PRESERVE OUR PLATEAU ANNEXATION Response to King County Road Services Division May 1,2006 Memo Bob Mac Onie and I have reviewed the above referenced memo and consequently, addressed the two minor corrections noted in said memo. The first requested correction was to Page 3, Paragraph 3. The request was to add a reference "south right-of-way margin of SE 149`"Street" to said Paragraph 3, as said right-of-way was referenced in the following paragraph. However, we thought it best to remove the reference to the right-of-way in the fourth paragraph, thereby eliminating the need to add the reference to the third paragraph. This seems to work as well as the other. The second requested correction was to an Auditor's File No. on Page 4. Said correction has been made. We hope that this completes the legal description review phase of the subject annexation. See the attachment. The rest of the memo concerning exclusion of portions of right-of-way in the proposed annexation and the segregation of a parcel by both the annexation boundary and the Urban Growth Boundary Line, are items that need to be addressed by others. \H:\File Sys\LN[a-C,and Subdivisian&Surveying Records\L.NB-2Q-Shart PIRts\SAVPLTANNX.dac , � PRESERVE OUR PLATEAU ANNEXATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION The lands included within the Preserve Our Plateau Annexation area are situated in Sections 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 23, & 24 all in Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. and Sections 18 and 19, both in Township 23 North, Range 6 East, W.M., all in King County, Washington, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the northerly right-of-way margin of SE 128`h St with the easterly line of the existing City of Renton Limits as annexed under Ordinance No. 4829, in the Southwest quarter of said Section 11; Thence easterly along said northerly right-of way margin, crossing 155t" Ave SE and 156th Ave SE, to the east line of the Southwest quarter of said Section 11, said east line also being the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) line; Thence continuing easterly along the courses of the northerly right-of-way margin of SE 128`h St and said UGB line, crossing 160th Ave SE and the west half of 164th Ave SE, to the section line common to said Sections 11 and 12; Thence continuing easterly along the courses of the northerly right-of-way margin of SE 128th Street and said UGB line, crossing the east half of 164t" Ave SE and 169t" Ave SE, to an intersection, in the Southwest quarter of said Section 12, with the northerly extension of the east line of the West quarter of the Northeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of said Section 13; Thence southerly along said northerly extension and said east line, and said UGB line, to an intersection with the north line of the Southeast quarter of the Northwest quarter; Thence easterly along said north line and said UGB line, to the west line of the East quarter of said subdivision; Thence southerly along said west line and said UGB line, to the Northwest corner of Lot 1 of King County Short Plat S90S0040, as recorded in Book 101 of Surveys, Page 236, records of King County, Washington; Thence easterly along the North line of said Lot 1 and said UGB line, to the northeast corner of said Lot 1, said northeast corner also being on the west line of the Northeast quarter of said Section 13; Thence easterly along said UGB line, crossing 172°�Ave SE, to the intersection of the easterly right-of-way margin of 172"d Ave SE and the southerly right-of-way margin of SE 132°d St; Thence continuing easterly along the southerly right-of-way margin of SE 132°d St and said UGB line, crossing 173rd Ave SE, 175th Ave SE, 178`" Ave SE and the west half of 180th Ave SE, to an intersection with the east line of said subdivision, said east line also being the west line of the Southwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of said Section 18; Thence continuing easterly along said right-of-way margin of SE 132°� St and said UGB line, crossing the east half of 180t" Ave SE, 181 st Ave SE and 182°d Ave SE, to an intersection with the easterly right-of-way margin of 182°`� Ave SE; Thence southerly along said easterly right-of-way margin of 182°� Ave SE and said UGB line, to an intersection with the northerly right-of-way margin of SE 134th St in the Southwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of said Section 18; Thence easterly along said northerly right-of-way margin of SE 134`" St and the easterly extension of said northerly right-of-way margin and said UGB line, crossing 184�" Ave SE, to an intersection with the easterly right-of-way margin of 184t" Ave SE in the Southeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of said Section 18; Thence southerly along said easterly right-of-way margin of 184`" Ave SE and the southerly extension thereof and said UGB line, crossing SE 135th St, SE 136th St and SE 144th St, to an intersection with the southerly right-of-way margin of SE 144`" St, as deeded to King County per King County Recording No. 3000495 in the Northwest quarter of said Section 19; Thence westerly along said southerly right-of-way margin of SE 144th St and said UGB line, to an intersection with the east line of Renton-Suburban Tracts Division No. 8, as recorded in Volume 69 of Plats, Pages 74-76, inclusive, records of King County, Washington, in Government Lot 1 of said Section 19; Thence southerly along said east line and said UGB line, to the Southeast corner of said Plat; Thence westerly along the courses of the south boundary of said plat and said UGB line, to an intersection with the south line of Renton-Suburban Tracts Div. No. 6, as recorded in Volume 66 of Plats, Pages 33-35, inclusive, records of King County, Washington, in the Northeast quarter of said Section 24; Thence westerly along the south line of said plat and said UGB line, to the most southwest corner of said plat, said southwest corner also being the northeast corner of Government Lot 5 of said Section 24; Thence southerly along the east line of said Government Lot 5 and said UGB line, to the northeast corner of Lot 31 of Renton-Suburban Tracts Div. No. 7, as recorded in Volume 69 of Plats, Pages 39-41, inclusive, records of King County, Washington; Thence southwesterly and northwesterly along the south boundary of said plat and said UGB line, to an intersection with the east line of Government Lot 10 of said Section 24, said east line also being the east line of Tract A of Briarwood South No. 6, as recorded in Volume 97 of Plats, Pages 68-69, records of King County, Washington; Thence northerly along said east line of said Government Lot 10 and said Tract A and said UGB line, to the northeast corner of said Tract A; Thence westerly along the courses of the north boundary of said Tract A, and said UGB line, to the northwest corner of said Tract A, said northwest corner also being a point on the east line of the Northeast quarter of said Section 23; Thence northerly along said east line and said UGB line, to the northeast corner of Tract C of Skyfire Ridge Div. No. 1, as recorded in Volume 141 of Plats, Pages 93-99, inclusive, records of King County, Washington; Thence westerly along the courses of the north boundary of said Tract C and said UGB line, to the northwest corner of said Tract C, said northwest corner also being a point on the east line of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of said Section 23; Thence northerly along said east line and said UGB line, to the northeast corner of said subdivision; Thence westerly along the north line of said subdivision and said UGB line, to the northwest corner of said subdivision, said northwest corner also being the northeast corner of Government Lot 7 of said Section 23; Thence North 88° 00'30" West, along the narth line of said Government Lot 7 and said UGB line in said Section 23, a distance of 100 feet; Thence South 31° 31'00" West, along said UGB line, a distance of 648 feet; Thence North 55°51'30" West, along said UGB line, a distance of 250 feet; Thence South 31°31'00" West, along said UGB line, a distance of 150 feet; Thence North 55°51'30" West, along said UGB line, to an intersection with the southeasterly right-of-way margin of 154th Pl SE (Orton County Road); Thence southwesterly along said southeasterly right-of-way margin of 154th Pl SE and said UGB line, to an intersection with the northeasterly right-of-way margin of J. E. Jones Rd. No. 1182 in said Government Lot 7, said intersection also being the point at which the UGB line and the boundary line for the subject annexation diverge; Thence northwesterly crossing 154t" Pl SE, to the point of intersection of the northeasterly right-of-way margin of said J. E. Jones Rd. No. 1182 and the northwesterly right-of-way margin of 154t" Pl SE; Thence northeasterly, northerly and northwesterly along the northwesterly right-of-way margin of 154th Pl SE, as established in 1962 and as currently paved for use, said right- of-way also being, in part, the northwesterly right-of-way margin of W. J. Orton Road No. 2023 by Deed, bearing Auditor's File No. 2126697 and recorded in Volume 1300 of Deeds, Page 221, records of King County, Washington, to an intersection with the north line of the northwest quarter of said Section 23; Thence northwesterly, northerly and northeasterly along said northwesterly right-of-way margin of 154th Pl SE, said right-of-way margin also being on a curve to the right, having a street center line radius of 358.1 feet, to an intersection with the southerly extension of the westerly right-of-way margin of 154th Ave SE (Maple Street) as dedicated in Cedar River Five Acre Tracts, as recorded in Volume 16 of Plats, Page 52, records of King County, Washington, in the Southwest quarter of said Section 14; Thence northerly along the westerly right-of-way margin of 154t" Ave SE, to its intersection with the southerly right-of-way margin of SE 142"`� St; Thence westerly, along said southerly right-of-way margin of said SE 142°� St, crossing 152"d Ave SE, to a point of intersection with the southerly extension of the westerly right- of-way margin of 152°d Ave SE, in the Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of said Section 14; Thence northerly along said southerly extension and said westerly right-of-way margin of 152°d Ave SE, crossing SE 142�d St, SE 141`t Pl, SE 140th Pl, SE 139th Pl and SE 138t" Pl, to the northeast corner of Briar Hills No. 4, as recorded in Volume 113 of Plats, Page 77, records of King County; Thence westerly along the the north line of said Plat, crossing 148th Place SE, to the northwest corner of said plat, said northwest corner also being the northeast corner of Briarwood Lane, as recorded in Volume 104 of Plats, Pages 30 and 31, records of King County, in the Southeast quarter of said Section 15, Thence continuing westerly along the north line of said Briarwood Lane plat, to the northwest corner thereof; Thence southerly along the west line of said plat, to the southwest corner thereof, said southwest corner also being a point on the north line of the South quarter of the South half of the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of said Section 15, and also being a point on the narth line of Maple Ridge, as recorded in Volume 86 of Plats, Pages 85 and 86, records of King County; Thence westerly, northeasterly, northwesterly and westerly along the various courses of the north line of said Plat, to the northwest corner thereof; Thence southerly along the west line of said Plat, to an intersection with the south line of the Northwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of said Section 15; Thence westerly along said south line and the westerly extension of said south line, crossing 144t"Ave SE, to a point on the westerly right-of-way margin of 144t" Ave SE in the Northwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of said Section 15; Thence northerly along said westerly right-of-way margin, crossing SE 138th St, to an intersection with the existing City of Renton Limits as annexed under Ordinance No. 5171, at the intersection of said westerly right-of-way margin of 144`" Ave SE and the southerly right-of-way margin of NE 2°`� St; Thence generally northerly and easterly along the existing City Limits of Renton, as annexed under Ordinance Nos. 5171, 4876, 4760, 5140, 4760, 5064 and 4829, crossing SE 128`" St, to the point of beginning. �ti`�Y O� CITY OF RENTON as Economic Development,Neighborhoods and ♦ ru ♦ Strategic Planning .,t��O,� Kathy Keoiker,Mayor Alex Pietsch,Administrator ,lr March 28, 2006 Lenora Blauman Executive Secretary Washington State Boundary Review Board for King County 400 Yesler Way,Room 402 Seattle, WA 98104 SUBJECT: MAPLEWOOD ADDITION ANNEXATION(FILE 2197)—EXTENSION OF REVIEW PERIOD Dear Ms. Blauman: As you lrnow,the City of Renton verbally agreed in February 2005,to allow simultaneous review of this annexation along with the incorporation proposal for the proposed City of Fairwood, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 36.93.116. It did so in response to concerns expressed by residents within the proposed Maplewood Addition Annexation,that there was insufficient information on the proposed incorporation to decide whether they preferred to become a part of Renton or a potential City of Fairwood. On November 23, 2005,the City authorized extending the Board's review period to April 30,2006, believing this would provide adequate time for completion of their work. However,due to delays in releasing the consultant's final version of the Analysis of Financial Feasibility of the Proposed City of Fairwood until January 17,2006,this schedule had to be modified. The City of Renton therefore, in order to continue to facilitate simultaneous review,is hereby authorizing the Boundary Review Board to extend their review period by another 45 days,to June 16,2006. We hope that this will allow the Board sufficient time to complete its deliberations following public hearings for both the Maplewood Addition Annexation and its possible expansion, as well as the public hearings now scheduled for the proposed City of Fairwood. Since�ely, � � Alex Pietsch Administrator cc� Jay Coving[on Rebecca Lind Don Erickson H:�EDNSP�PAA�A��t�og��a�y�v��tio��x��g�o��055 R E N T O N AHEAD OF THE CURVE �This oaoercontains 50%recvcled matenal.30%oost consumer -� Washington State Boundary Review Board For King County Yesler Building, Room 402, 400 Yesler Wiry, Seattle, WA 98104 Pjione: (206)296-6800 • Fnx: (206)296-6803 • {tttp://wzvzv.meh�okc.gov/rrn�texatiorts April 5, 2006 City of Renton Attn: Don Erickson, AICP Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98058 RE: SUMMARY File No. 2231 - City of Renton - Preserve Our Plateau Annexation Dear Mr. Erickson: Enclosed is the Summary prepared by Boundary Review Board staff for the above-referenced Notice of Intention. The Summary will be sent to the Boundary Review Board members, along with the Notice of Intention, as part of the agenda packet for the next regular monthly Board meeting. If you see any corrections or clarifications which should be made in the Summary, I would appreciate hearing from you at (206) 296-6801. Sincerely, Lenora Blauman Executive Secretary Enclosure: Summary FORM 11 �y s SUMMARY FILE NO. 2231 Thomas Guide Map No. 657 Date Received: 03/30/05 Date Completed: 03/30/05 Date Distributed: 04/03/05 ENTITY City of Renton Date Filed: ACTION Petition/Resolution by Renton City Council for Land Annexation (Election Method) Expiration 45 Days: 05/14/06 TITLE Preserve Our Plateau Ar.nexation Board Meeting: 04/20/06 Introduction: The City of Renton, at the request of citizens, proposes annexation of the Preserve Our Plateau Area. The annexation has been proposed by the petition/election method (RCW 35A.14). The City has invoked jurisdiction to permit public review of the annexation proposal by the Washington State Boundary Review Board for King County, an independent, quasi- judicial agency.) Location The Preserve Our Plateau Annexation Area is located on the eastern edge of the City of Renton. The Annexation Area is generally bordered on the west by the City of Renton. The remainder of the Annexation Area is bordered by Unincorporated King County. Land Area 1475 acres Land Use Existinp: 1630 Single Family Homes Estimated Future: 2400 Single Family Homes Population Existinq: 4672 persons Estimated Future: 6212 persons Assessed Valuation $505,000,000 County Comprehensive Plan Designation Existinq: Residential Use— Urban Density(R-4—R-12); Office Uses County Zoning Existinq: R-4 (Primary Zoning Designation); R-6 (Permits 4 - 6 dwelling units per gross acre plus bonuses and transfer of development rights) City Comprehensive Plan Proposed: Residential Uses (Low Density Single-Family Residential) City Zoning Proposed: R-4 (Four dwelling units per net acre) District Comprehensive Plan Not applicable. District Franchise Not applicable Urban Growth Area (UGA) The Preserve Our Plateau Area is located within the Urban Growth Area as identified under the State Growth Management Act, King County Comprehensive Plan and City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. SEPA Declaration The Preserve Our Plateau Area was addressed in an Environmental Impact Statement prepared for the City of Renton's Comprehensive Plan. The proposed Preserve Our Plateau Annexation is exempt from SEPA pursuant to RCW 43.21 C.222 ENTITIES/AGENCIES NOTIFIED: King County Council Member(s) Reagan Dunn King County: Clerk of Council, Department of Assessments, Fire Marshal, Health Division, State Department of Ecology, Puget Sound Regional Council, Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (Metro) Cities: Not Applicable Fire Districts: King County Fire Protection District No. 25; Eastside Fire and Rescue (District No. 10) Water Districts: King County Water District No. 90; City of Renton Public Works Department Sewer Districts: City of Renton Public Works Department School District: Renton School District#403; Issaquah School District#411 SUMMARY(File No. 2231 j The City of Renton proposes the annexation of 1475 acres, known as the Preserve Our Plateau Area. The Preserve Our Plateau Area Annexation is proposed based upon a Resolution by the Renton City Council approving a plan to incorporate this territory. This Resolution was approved in February of 2006. With the annexation application based upon the Resolution, the City of Renton has invoked jurisdiction at the Boundary Review Board. The City is seeking a public hearing in order to provide an opportunity for Preserve Our Plateau citizens to comment upon the proposed annexation. Further, the City of Renton Resolution calls for an annexation election to permit the citizens of the Preserve Our Plateau Area to ultimately decide whether or not to join the City of Renton. The Preserve Our Plateau Annexation Area is located on the eastern edge of the City of Renton. The Annexation Area is generally bordered on the west by the City of Renton. The Annexation Area is bordered on the north, east and the south by unincorporated King County. The unincorporated Preserve Our Plateau Area is included in the "Land Use Element" of the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. The Plan was established in 1995 and has been updated annually since that initial adoption. Based upon that Comprehensive Plan, and pursuant to RCW 35A.14, the City proposes annexation of the Preserve Our Plateau Area. The proposed Preserve Our Plateau Area Annexation would be consistent with the City of Renton Plan (e.g., Annexation Policies and Land Use Policies), including those provisions relating to land development, service provision, and mutual social and economic benefits — e.g., L-5.2.1, L-5.3.2, L- 5.4, and L-5.6.) The City of Renton reports that the proposed Preserve Our Plateau Annexation also conforms to the State Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A.) For example, the annexation is supported by RCW 36.70.20, which requires community planning goals, for urban growth, services and infrastructure, and environmental preservation. Additionally, the application reportedly is consistent with RCW 36.70A.020 (1), encouraging development in urban areas where there are adequate public services. It is also consistent with RCW 36.70A.020 (12), which calls for public services to support permitted development. Annexation would permit the City of Renton to establish land use designations and zoning standards for Preserve Our Plateau. The City proposes residential designations that permit less intensive uses than those designations established by King County for the Preserve Our Plateau Area. Thus, annexation would permit development of primary land uses and corollary public services (e.g., roadways) as envisioned in RCW 36.70A and as appropriate to the Preserve Our Plateau Area. More specifically: • As established by RCW 36.70A, upon annexation of the Preserve Our Plateau Area, the City is prepared to provide development revie�r� services and general administrative services to the annexation area under local, regional, and state standards At present Preserve Our Plateau is substantially developed with approximately 1630 homes. There are opportunities for redevelopment and new development which could bring a total of approximately 2400 single- family homes to the Area. ■ As established by RCW 36.70A, upon annexation the Preserve Our Plateau Area will be governed by the City of Renton's critical areas ordinances. The City of Renton is prepared to provide environmental review (including evaluation and regulation of environmentally sensitive areas.) Environmentally sensitive areas in and near to Preserve Our Plateau would also be preserved with the proposed annexation. Further, the Preserve Our Plateau Annexation is reported to be consistent with the King County Comprehensive Plan. Following are examples of King County Comprehensive Plan/Countywide Planning Policies that are addressed by the proposed Preserve Our Plateau Annexation: FW-13:Cities are the appropriate providers of local urban services to Urban Areas. LU-31: The County should identify urban development areas within the Urban Growth Area LU-32: The County should encourage cities to annex territory within their designated potential annexation area LU-33: Land within a city's potential annexation area shall be developed according to local and regional growth phasing plans U-203 Land within Urban Growth Area is encouraged to support the preponderance of population and employment growth. U-301 King County should work with cities to support annexations within the Urban Growth Area when consistent with the King County Comprehensive Plan. U-304 King County should support annexation proposals when such annexation would accommodate urban densities and efficient land use patterns consistent with the King County Comprehensive Plan. The proposed Preserve Our Plateau Annexation is reportedly consistent with the provisions of RCW 36.93 (Boundary Review Board Regulations). For example, this annexation would be consistent with Objective 1, which calls for the preservation of neighborhoods. This area is linked to Renton by social fabric (e.g., similar land uses, regional and local open spaces and by natural/built geographic features (e.g., plateau terrain). This annexation would also reportedly be consistent with Objective 3, which calls for creation of logical service areas, and Objectives 4-7, which call for the achievement of reasonable boundaries for a jurisdiction. The present Preserve Our Plateau Area is an "island" of unincorporated land. Although the Preserve Our Plateau Area possesses a rather unusual configuration, the lands within these borders are specifically established for annexation by Renton under the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan (approved by the State of Washington in 1995). Further the boundaries of the proposed annexation area reflect citizen interest in affiliation with this locai jurisdiction. With annexation to Renton, all services and land use regulations for the Preserve Our Plateau Area reportedly may be efficiently coordinated under unified regulatory authorities administered by a single local government unit. Upon annexation, the City of Renton wiil include the Preserve Our Plateau properties in its Service Area. The City of Renton has planned and can provide urban services to the area either directly or via agreements between the City and service providers. For example, the City of Renton will assume responsibility for provision of fire/emergency services to the Preserve Our Plateau Annexation properties. The Renton Police Department would serve the residents. King County Water District No. 90 will continue to provide water and sewer services to the area. The City of Renton would provide sewer services to the Preserve Our Plateau Area. Portions of the Annexation Area are currently being served by the City of Renton in areas in which Sewer Availability Certificates were issued prior to December of 2005. At that time, the City invoked a moratorium on the issuance of sewer availability certificates in the Annexation Area. Annexation would permit , , . citizens to determine the likely form of future development (together with the policies relating to the issuance of sewer availability certificates). The City has sufficient capacity to accommodate the build out of the estimated remaining developable land in the entire proposed Preserve Our Plateau Annexation Area (1475 acres). Area students would be served by the Renton School District and the Issaquah School District. The City of Renton Library and the King County Library would be accessible to citizens. Local and regional recreation facilities would be available to residents. Existing parks are available for utilization as currently developed and/or for redevelopment to preserve open spaces and upgrade recreational facilities. This annexation would also reportedly be consistent with Objective 8, which calls for inc�usion of urban areas within municipalities. Annexation would permit citizens to affiliate with a local government and thus to participate in the local government process. The City of Renton has reportedly conducted fiscal analyses related to the proposed Preserve Our Plateau Annexation. Study findings report that existing facilities and services in the Annexation Area are generally adequate while less than levels of service provided to citizens of Renton. More specifically, municipal resources will be provided to ensure sufficient funds to serve the area in a manner that will address impacts on cost and adequacy of services, finances, debt structure or rights of other governmental units. The City is committed to hiring staff as necessary to ensure equivalent levels of service for the Preserve Our Plateau Area both at current development and at estimated maximum development. Further, study findings indicate that the costs of services will be essentia�ly offset by property taxes, standard service fees, and other revenues based on population. For example, upon annexation, property owners will assume their share of the regular and special levy rate of the City for capital facilities and public services. If the City were to assume responsibility for this Area at current levels of development and current staffing levels, a subsidy would be required at an estimated $284,658 each year (based upon 2006 values). At full development, estimated to occur in 2016, the subsidy would be reduced to $132,224 per year(based on 2006 values). The City reportedly supports the Preserve Our Plateau Annexation so that Renton may serve citizens of the area. - Washington State Boundary Review Board For King County Yesler Building,Room 402,400 Yesler Way,Seattl�, WA 98104 Phone:(206)296-6800 •Fax:(206)296-6803 • http:/fwww.metrokc.gov/annexations May 3, 2006 City of Renton Attn; Don Erickson, ACIP Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 RE: REQUEST FOR REVISED LEGAL DESCRIPTION File No. 2231 —City of Renton—Preserve Our Plateau Annexation Dear Mr. Erickson: Enclosed please find a copy of the letter from King County Engineering staff regarding the legal description submitted as part of the above Notice of Intention. If you are in agreement with the corrections and suggestions made in the letter,please submit a revised legal description to our office as soon as possible. The corrected legal description must be used on all future documents related to this proposal. We suggest you direct any questions concerning the County Engineering recommendations to Nicole Keller,Road Services Division, at 206-296-3731. Sincerely, ��7-"... ' Lenora Blauman Executive Secretary Enclosure: Letter from King County Road Services Division cc: Anne Noris, Clerk of the Council (w/o enclosures) Lydia Reynolds-Jones, Manager,Project Support Services(w/o enclosures) FORM 8 � RECEIVED MAY � _ 2006 King County ykpsm�eo�naary�swow Road Services Division ��' Department of Transportatfon KSC-TR-0231 201 South]ackson Street Seattle,WA 98104-3856 May 1,2006 Lenora Blauman Executive Secretary Boundary Review Board YES-BR-0402 RE: Citv of Renton—Preserve Our Plateau Annexation(BRB File 2231) Dear Ms. Blauman: Thank you for the opportunity to review the legal description for the proposed Preserve Our Plateau Annexation to the City of Renton transmitted with your March 30, 20061etter. Staff reviewed the enclosed revised Iegal description and found it varied slightly from the enclosed highlighted maps. The legal description is satisfactory,except for two minor conections. With these corrections the legal description will be complete and may be finalized. Page 3,Paragraph 3, add"and the south right-of-way margin of SE 149th Street"to the end of the paragraph. This is needed,because Paragraph 4 references "said right-of-way." Page 4,Paragraph 3,where it reads "Auditor's File No. 2126698",it should read "Auditor's File No. 2126697." When reviewing legal descriptions for annexations, staff attempts to identify islands of unincorporated County and/or marginal road rights-of-way that may have been overlooked by the City in developing the legal description. For this particular annexation,the submitted legal description did not exclude any islands of annexable rights-of-way. There are several portions of rights-of-way which have been excluded from the proposed annexation area. The proposed annexation area excludes these portions of rights-of-way,in order to follow the adopted Urban Growth Boundary Line. However,this creates a potential conflict with RCW 35.13.290 which prohibits the incorporation of portions of rights-of-way. The following list includes road segments, where a portion of the right-of- way width extends beyond the Urban Crrowth Boundary Line: • The northern portion of SE 128th Street,between 160th Avenue SE and 164th Avenue SE. • A small portion of SE 128th Street near 169th Avenue SE. • Where SE 144th Street meets 184th Avenue SE,the intersection is segregated. • The SE 147th Place cul-de-sac just east of 183rd Avenue SE. ��(�1l02M Lenora Blauman � May 1, 2006 Page 2 There is one parcel,tax lot#404560-7777,which is segregated by both the proposed annexation boundary and the Urban Growth Boundary Line. For reproducibzlity, annexation boundaries should follow existing established legal boundaries or record of surveys for newly established boundary lines. This annexation includes Maplewood Park,Maplewood Heights Park, and Cedar River and Lake Sammamish Trail sites. The Department of Natural Resources and Parks has been copied on this memo. The following addresses are locations of King County-maintained off-road stormwater facilities within the annexation boundary: • 15616 SE 143rd Place, • 14731 160th Place SE, • 16225 SE 145th Street, • 16404 164th Avenue SE, � 14240 164th Avenue SE, • 16203 SE 137th Place, • 16241 SE 137th Place, � 16712 SE 144th Street, and • 17407 SE 136th Street. The following list of new streets within the proposed annexation boundary remain under maintenance-defect bonds with King County,as posted by the developer for the required two-year maintenance-defect period: • SE 136th Lane, SE 137th Place, 152nd Place SE, 153rd Place SE,Road Log 19307; • 154th Avenue SE,Road Log 19389; and • 152nd Avenue SE, and SE 136th Street,Road Log 81075. If you have any questions,please contact Nicole Keller,Vacations and Boundaries Engineer, at 206-296-3731,or via e-mail at Nicole.Keller@metrokc.gov. Sincerely, +�-C�� ydia Reynolds-Jones Manager Project Support Services LRJ:NK:mr Enclosures Lenora Blauman May 1, 2006 Page 3 cc: Anne Noris, Clerk of the King County Council (w/enclosures) Paulette Norman,P.E.,County Road Engineer,Road Services Division Delite Morris, Senior Engineer,Engineering Services Section,Road Services Division Debbie Clazk,Administrative Specialist,Department of Assessments Robert Nunnenkamp,Property Agent,Department of Natural Resources and Parks Daisy Tamayo, GIS Specialist,Department of Assesssments Nicole Keller,Engineer I�,Engineering Services Section,Road Services Division Lenora Blauman May l, 2006 Page 4 bcc: Megan Smith,Legislative Analyst,Growth Management and Unincorporated Areas Committee \ s�au��d `a�u��a�l a�u�� pu� a��ai� s�uao�l sai�a�.�a�S 1� 8fT ` Z = u 900 Z ` -b- � ��W �a�� uoi�.�xauu� ��.ua�.o� ua�ua}� �s�3 i I �d �/�I � o � ��xau ub ,��.0 r� o� � u i� �pn�S (dM) ��uno� 6ui>I sai6a��a�S 12� uoi��exauu� �o ani�.aoddns aaoua ��nnauaos aa� s�a.��e papn��x3 uoi��xauu� �.o ani�..�oddns ssa� si �a.�� n�a��d a�l s.�a�on papi�apun �C�n.��. nna� a.�� a.�a�l pasoddo ui�uaa,� �C��.�o��ua �nq �spapi�apun sas�a.��ui uo��xauu� �i�dS ��a��a a�q��a.�dd� �au s�y �(�uno� �u�� u��ua.�a�.a.� a��n�u�� uo�.ua� �.s�� ui uoi��cauu� �o u.�si�i�.da��s ��u��.sqns si a.��►�1 s � u � u � �� % SL'Z + �o.�aa �o ui�.��W :86 I `( = u 900Z `�b'£ ��W uo��u��s�M`�(�uno� �ui� ''^� 2'.=.. 6 6 � ��✓� 'r� ?� / �� ; ��i� / �wi �•t !f O 3 IS �� 9�r .�a- „� ��s.�� UA �.,`��Cl�� y ��'�.f y �v��,#� '� t < A�.�� ' ``�,s � k �� ,s ,� �...r s�f'�'� a ��s,�y � ;; l h � ,✓ � �� '�"��' �b £� £6y ��l�i6^ �h f �� d�ii%- �1 � �� ,�'f ��x�'t "�rv t� 3 � � �: f ��v�,- a �� rs�,�a��y�,� ��. ��'��z ? ?� f?�rC �{�� N� �i d,� . Ny- �p�'�p . ��-0 ��Y�y'^'� � �fY ��.s-�.4/ � �'� � �4' FS'f Y% 'Sf�kt``;, �_ � . � � ,�,� .� °� i �. Fy f�, S � �'�� . y r v'Y�' .7l 6 �r�r s 9 ��. 1&��s �,f f��i i ` v.!'�'•. a"�H( S! d" s�r , � �: / k�l+a �� X+��'G'y 9ky��.,� � / . +'� ��'X'�z ��' /�/� +,��j f v�Y' �, ��' }� 3�r� �i'��'� . �� 1�ePu(1 � . � � �� uo�.ua� �o ��.�� ►�� o� uc��c�uub ,�o� �..��d�ns % SL�Z + .�o.a.aa }o ui�.�eW :86� '� W u 9ooz `�-� ��w oN papi�apun sa� �� uo��uiyseM`�(zuno� �ui� aa��p n�a��ld Il�d �. �- �� w=. : 0 �� _ 9 . � �S s � �. � � �; � 3 . � � �� : �� F � _� � . � S Z 9 I �_____ _� ______ . ,, � _�_ _____ _ __�_ _� � � �,�� , ; ��y , � � __��__�_�_ � � � �___ ___.�_. _��____.� �___ � � � � O S'Z£ �� __��._�.__ � __ �� ,� �,,�� __._.______�_.�___��_�__�_��___.�____��_�._._�.� �__._._�._��_.Mr��_�____.___�__ 5L'8t� 9S 6S �69 .��_�.�.�.___.___��._.__�_mm_... �..w_��_.._�. �_�_�_��_�.�__�__�._.___�..__�w____�___�__� ._.__�.__�_�____��,_�____.__�_��.v__�____�._�.�___ _ p4'S 9 uc��.u�� c��. uc��.�xauud .�o� �.,�caddn� � � � ..�. �"'�" � � � Gl_ � �"3 t�"Y � tn p Q,, c� � \ � C1. rt- � Q' s;� �� "��`��`�`H � � �� ;$ � �� a � a : � � �� r� �` ��F�� '� � �,�� . � ..;� � _ —p �°�°�' \ � "� w � �� '�� " (� � o -z � �.� .. � � \ � ��,.�_:°:. ��V � t'D � �� 3 � � �' oa °�a �' n o ° -,, c � 3 '� � � � � � o � � � i+ ;`' ? N � � lVi-� O � o � � N -p V'� s,� w � _ � � � �l tn N O D O cn O tn O 0��,�:� ��q� � � � � ` � � � � � � _ � _ o� �:� _ �� i � � � � ; � £ � w '' � � _ , _ _ � � ; i � i E i � .... . . .... .. .... ...... . ... .. � � �. � . .. . . . ... � .. � � . .. . . � . � ; ��i . w .. . .. . �: . . �. . . .. { � . . .... ... . . .. .. . . i �. Z E E � o � — � ' � � .Q j = -� � ! : � € � � �� r;i ��: F ' � �� e: ;/ Q ; � E � � �$x � � , �-��3«. � � . C ; _ � � ? � E �». I�L� � � f E � . rr� : �\ � � _ lV � � E x n � ` �" a � � � � c�' � ... . ..... ..... . ..... . . . .. . � ..... ..... F �� . .. . � . N � � `� � _ � E ; �. ; = I ; � � � � � ; � � � � �� y� � � � � � ��~ � � � ii � � ; _ � �� r� ' € �o ( � � 3 � � � € � � c, � �-* � ! � � � � � o�a � � f O � �' � N ,�-r 1 3 � � € o � � _ i � �� + ;^' N � i � N � � � ' [ � � V N O'q � ` � � � tn O r-r o\° O� � •pa}iq�yo�d uo�j�nPo�da� pazuoy�nou� •pan�osab s}N�'!b Ilb' '400z�y6u�cdo� LOZO-tZL IlLS) �yd t7�£ZZ tJn �DIJPUDX3'd OOV 3�inS '�a;ua� OZpfd IDUQ� (3(� sai6a;o�}S 121 � n o�C u �e �I �I1 AnnexatianArea Hierachical Vote preference + May 3-4,2006 1,500 Target Respondents N Plateau Oth�r Stronq Yes Weakllean Yes Undecided WeaklLean No Stronq No Alt Pact NOne Undead�! Total 1,198 621 �77 183 175 58 166 616 187 178 68U 153 1.Annexation Area Plateau 49% 100°lo f1% 33% 62% 57% 59% 46% 33°to 48% 56°l0 39% Other 51% 0°l0 100°/a 67% 38% 43% 41% 54% 67o1c 52010 44°l0 61°l0 2. Hierarchal Vote Strong Yes 18% 1E}°lo 25°l0 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 62°h 14°fo �°la 91%' WeaklLean Yes 18°/u 2Q$/o 15'�0 0% 100% 0% 0°/u 0% 24°l0 29% �°l0 22°l0 Undecided 5% 6°la 4% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% �3°fc 5°Ia 3°fo 17°Ia WeaklLean No 13% 16°la "t2°fo 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 5°� 24% 14°!a 28°10 St�ong No 46% 4$°la 44"1u 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 5% 29°la 76% 2�% 3. Preference All 18% 1�i°/it ��°Ja 68% 25% 14% 5% 1% '��%a �°lo U°lo �% Part 13% 11% 15% 16% 30% 14% 23% 8% 0°la 144°Ic 0°Ia 0°Io None 51% 53% 4$% 5% 25% 29% 50% 85% 0°ja 0% 1fl4°lo 4°1a Undecided 19% 21% 15°/a 11% 20% 43% 23% 6% po�a �ofo Qo� •��% 4. Gender Female 53% 51°l0 5E�3% 43% 67% 86% 32% 53% 3$%a 57% 54°10 5Q% I Male 47% 49°l0 44% 57% 33% 14% 68% 47% 62°1u 43% 46% 30°ls ' 5.Age 18-34 13% 8% 17°la 10% 10% 29% 5% 15% ��% ��% "�3°fo 6% 35-44 14% 16% 12°1s 14% 10% 43% 27% 8% �°ja 24°l0 1�% 17°k , 45-59 36% 37°10 35°l0 38% 43% 29% 36% 35% 38°l0 24°fa 35°lo SO°/n 60+ 38% 39% 36°fa 38% 38% 0% 32% 42% 3$% 3$°Jo 4Q°lo 28°l0 6. Income <$30,000 6% 6°�i 6% 6% 6% 0% 6% 10% U°10 15°fo 7°fo � fl% . $30,000-49,999 9% $°l0 9t�% 6% 11% 20% 12% 8% 6°l0 35°la 9% 9°l0 $50,000-69,999 28% 25°l0 28°la 31% 39% 40% 18% 21% 29°l0 15°Io 22°fa 3fi% $70,000-89,999 27% 29%a 28°!0 13% 22% 20% 35% 31% 24°l0 23°l0 3U°lo 36°l0 >_$90,000 31% 33°l0 28°l0 44% 22% 20% 29% 29% 41°l0 31°h 31% 18% 7.ArealGender Plateau/Female 25%a 51% 0°/u 19% 48% 33% 18°/a 19% 1Q°lo 33°l0 26°/n 22°l0 PlateaulMale 24%u 49°/a i3°lo 14°/u 14°/u 11°/u 41°/u 27% 24% 14a10 3{}% 17°!a RT STRATEGIES Annexatian Atea Hierachical Vote Prefer�nce May 3-4,2006 1,500 Target Respondents N lateau {7ther Stronq Yes Weak/Lean Yes Undecided WeaklLean No Stronq No Alt Pad None Undecided Total 1,198 821 577 183 175 58 166 616 t87 �78 B8U 153 Other/Female 28% 0% 56% 24% 19% 44% 14% 34% 29°l0 24% L8% 2$°/u Other/Male 22% Q°lo 44aIo 43% 19% 11% 27% 20% 38°Jo 29°l0 16% 33% 8.ArealAge Plateau<60 30% 61% (}°!0 19% 33% 50% 45% 26% 24% 24% 34% 28°l0 Plateau>_60 19% 39°jo 0°Jo 14% 29% 13% 14% 20% 1Q°lo 24°l0 23°!0 11°l0 Othe1'<60 32% 4°/a 64°!0 43% 29% 38% 23°/a 32% 3$°l0 38% 26°l0 44% Other>_60 18% fl°/n �fi°lo 24% 10% 0% 18% 22% 29°fo 14% 78°10 17% 9.Arealincome Plateau<$70,000 20% 48°Io 0% 24% 38% 57% 23% 26% 19°!0 33°l0 28°l0 37% Plateau Z$70,000 22% 52°/0 0°lc 10% 24% 0% 36% 20% 14% 1$°la 29°!0 5°l0 Other<$70,000 30% 0°l0 52% 33% 24% 29% 27% 35% 29% 33°10 31°l0 26% Other>_$70,000 28% �°lo +�$°/a 33% 14% 14% 14% 19% 3$% 19°10 93% 32°l0 10. Precincts Bnar 12% $°!0 19°fo 13% 14% 13% 14% 12% 1�°� 23% 9% i6% Brigid 5% 5% a°fc 0% 3% 0% 9% 0% U°lo 5% 2°l0 4°l0 Daniel 10% t!% 19°!0 7% 10% 13% 9% 8% T7°Io 14°l0 6°Io $°lo Eastwood 10% 0% 20°!u 17% 10% 0% 9% 12% 13°l0 9% 16°!0 8°k Husky 12% 14% 0°l0 7% 7% 0% 14% 7% $% 9% 7°fo 24°l0 Ida 5% 12°l0 0°!c 3% 7% 13% 5% 7% 0% 0°/u 7°l0 12°/a Odonnell 4% 10°l0 0°k 0% 7% 13% 0% 9% {}°!a 0°l0 7% $°lo Renhill 4% �°lo '�g% 20% 3% 25% 9% 7% 1�°l0 �°l0 9°!0 8°fo Tanner 12% 4% 20°fu 13% 10% 0°/a 5% 18% 9°l0 14°l0 94°l0 $% Tanya 12% 15°fo Q% 10% 3% 0% 18% 5% 4°le 9% 9°l0 0°l0 Valencia 9% 28°In 0% 7% 21% 13% 9% 13% 9°!0 9% 19°l0 4°!0 Other 4% 4% 3% 3% 3% 13% 0% 3% 9°le 5°kr 1°10 4% RT STRATEGIES • Gender Age Income May 3-4,2006 1,500 Target Respondents N Female Male 48,'�+1 35_44 45�59 fi0+ 5 30 000 $30,000-49,999 $50,000-69,999 $70,000-89,999 Z 90 000 Total 1,198 624 574 188 231 397 382 71 107 332 320 368 1.Annexation Area Plateau 49% 47% 52% 32°l0 57% 59% 51°l0 50% 44% 48% 52% 55% Other 51% 53% 48% 68°l0 43°fo 4$°/u 49°/+� 50% 56% 52% 48% 45% 2. Hierarchal Vote St�o�g Yes 18% 12% 17% 11°/u 15°l0 1�% 15% 13% 10% 19% 7% 23% ! Weak/Lean Yes 18% 19% 10% '�'�°/a 1�l% 17�c "��3% 13% 20% 26% 14% 13% ' Undecided 5% 8% 1% 1'1°/a 1�J°fo �°fo �°�0 0% 10% 7% 4% 3% Weal(�Lean No 13% 9% 21% 6°!0 ��}% '��°to '�3°/a 13% 20% 11% 21% 16% Strong No 46% 52% 50% 61% 3Q°la 49% 57°l0 63% 40% 37% 54% 45% 3. Preference All 18% 11% 19% 22°Io 5°lc �B°lo 15°/A 0% 11% 22% 15% 23% Part 13% 17% 13% �T°lo �fi°ln 90Qh 15°la 33% 22% 9% 11% 13% None 51% 60% 54% 56% 63"l0 56Q/o 6(�°Jo 67% 56% 52% 59% 57% UndeCided 19% 13% 13% 6°la 16°l0 1$°10 9°la 0% 11% 17% 15% 7% 4. Gender Female 53% 100% 0% �3% 4$°l0 49% 56°l0 33% 33% 59% 41% 48% Male 47% 0% 100% 87°la 52°l0 59°le 4�% 67% 67% 41% 59% 52% 5.Age 18-34 13% 15% 10% 1{)(#a/o �#% Oolo Q°lo 14% 11% 7% 30% 13% 35-44 14% 12% 15% {I°/o 9f10°10 �1% 0°!0 14% 11% 19% 11% 16% 45-59 36% 33% 39% 0°!o fI% 100% 0% 29% 33% 41% 33% 45% 60+ 38% 40% 35% 0°fa {}°l0 0°!0 1Q0°jo 43% 44% 33% 26% 26% 6. income <$30,000 6% 4% 8% 6°/n 7% 5% 14°la 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% $30,000-49,999 9% 6% 11% 6% 3°l0 8% 13°fo 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% $50,000-69,999 28% 34% 21% 43°fo 33°l0 2$°la 2S°Io 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% $70,000-89,999 27% 23% 30% �l0 2D$la 23°l0 23°l0 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% >_$90,000 31% 32% 30% 25°fo 33% 36°fo 26°/a 0% 0% 0% 0°/a 100% 7.ArealGender Plateau/Female 25% 47% 0% 16% 24% 22% 32°l0 17% 22% 30% 19% 26% PlateaulMale 24% 0% 52°/a 16� 33°l0 29°l0 19°Io 33% 22% 19°/a 30% 29% RT STRATEGIES Gender Age income May 3-4,2006 1,500 Target Respondents N Female Male 18=34 35�4d 4� 6pt s 30 000 $30,000-49,999 $50,000-69 999 $70,000-89,999 � 90 000 Total 1,198 624 574 188 �31 397 3$2 71 107 332 320 368 OthedFemale 28% 53% 0% r�7% 24�10 27°!0 25°!a 17% 11% 30% 22% 23% OthedMale 22% 0% 48% 21°fo 19°l0 22% 25'/0 33% 44% 22% 30% 23% 8.ArealAge Plateau<60 30% 25% 37% 32°/u 57°/u 51°!a 0°l0 33% 33% 30% 33% 42% Pl2teau>_60 19% 22% 15% 4°fo U°lu 0°10 51% 17% 11% 19% 15% 13% Other<60 32% 36% 28% 6$% 43°l0 49°/a 0% 17% 22% 37% 41% 32% Othe�>_60 18% 17% 20% 0°/a U°Ja Q°/a �4�°10 33% 33% 15% 11% 13% 9.Arealincome • PlateBU<$70,000 20% 14% 21% 7°jo 20% 23% 23% 50% 44% 76% 0% 0% Plateau>_$70,000 22% 32% 32% 27°l0 40°/n 31�/0 26°l0 0% 0% 0% 79% 55% Other<$70,000 30% 16% 18% 13°!a 2�°fo 1$% 25°ja 50% 56% 24% 0% 0% Other>_$70,000 28% 38% 30% 53% 13°l0 2$°Iu 23°l0 0% 0% 0% 21% 45% 10. Precincts Briar 12% 12% 15% 5°lu 9% �fi°�o 4�J% 0% 22% 24% 7% 13% Brigid 5% 4% 1% # � � #� # # # # # Daniel 10% 8% 11% 11% 5%a 5% 14°/0 17% 0% 10% 14% 13% Eastwood 10% 10% 11% 21a10 5°!0 5°l0 14°l0 17% 22% 3% 10% 9% Husky 12% 5% 9% 2'�°fo g°lo 5°jo 3°jo 0% 11% 0% 17% 6% Ida 5% 6% 5% # # # # # # # # # Odonnell 4% 5% 5% # # # # # # # # # Renhill 4% 11% 8% # # # # # # # # # Tanner 12% 16% 8% 19°/s �°/a '�$°ja 8°/u 33% 0% 17% 7% 6% Tanya 12% 7% 8% 0°k 9% 9°l0 8°l0 17% 0% 0% 7% 13% Valencia 9% 14% 14% 5°jo 14% 9$°Io 14°lu 17% 0% 14% 14% 19% Othe� 4% 2% 4% 4°l0 5°In d°/u 3a/o 0% 0% 7% 7% 3% RT STRATEGIES - Ar�alGender Area/Age May 3-4,2006 1,500 Target Respondents N Pfat�au(Femate FlateatdMale Other et�e C?therlMtate Plateau<60 Plateau z 60 Other<60 Other z 60 Total 1,198 321 30U 3fl� 274 415 207 402 175 1.Annexation Area Plateau 49% �OU°ja 10Q% fl°!c 4°l0 100% 100% 0% 0% � Other 51% �°lu 0°!a 100°Jo �{}0°Io 0% 0% 100% 100% I� 2. Hierarchal Vote I Strong Yes 18% 11% $°l0 1�2% 26% 9% 11% 19% 19% WeaklLean Yes 18% 29'�0 $°l0 1(}°10 '�1°!a 16% 21% 13% 7% Undecided 5% $°10 8°l0 1tl% 3°/n 9% 4% 6% 0% Weak/Lean No 13% 11°/v 25°!0 7°Io 17°la 23% 11% 11% 15% Strong No 46% 4(}°l0 56°10 $1°Jo 43°l0 43% 54% 51% 59% 3. Preference All 18% 6% 14°l0 96Q/o 2$% 12% 7% 18% 23% Part 13% 29% 9% 13% 18% 12% 19% 18% 12% None 51% 62% 69°/u 58°!0 3$°Irt 64% 67% 47% 54% Undecided 19% 12°!0 9°Io 13°l0 18�/0 12% 7% 18% 12% 4. Gender Female 53% 10fI°/a t}% 14�°(0 0% 43% 62% 59% 50% Male 47% {1°fo �Q�I°fo Q% "�{�1°/a 57% 38% 41% 50% 5.Age 18-34 13% $°lo $°l0 21°l0 12°/a 13% 0% 27% 0% 35-44 14% 13°fo 19'�0 '�2°!0 12"!0 26% 0% 18% 0% 45-59 36% 32°1a 43°fa 35'70 35% 61% 0% 55% 0% 60+ 38% 47% 30°ja 33% 41°fo 0% 100% 0% 100% 6. income <$30,000 6% 4% 8% 4°!0 7°!a 6% 7% 3% 13% $30,000-09,999 9% $°la 8°l0 4°fo 15% 9% 7% 6% 19% $50,000-69,999 28% 33°la 19°l0 35°Io 22% 23% 33% 29% 25% $70,000-89,999 27% 21% 39'� 26°Jo 3{I°/a 26% 27% 32% 19% >_$90,000 31% 33°Io 35°Ia 3fl°lo 2�% 37% 27% 29% 25% 7.ArealGender PlateaulFemale 25% 1fl0°k Q°!u #l°!o U°lo 43% 62% 0% 0% Plateau/Male 24% 0°!0 1QD°fo Q%u U°lo 57% 38% 0% 0% RT STRATEGIES May 3-4,zoos ArealGender Area/Age 1,500 Target Respondents N Plafeau/Part�ale Piate ale QNerl��raie Othertivtale Plateau<60 Plateau�60 Other<60 Other z 60 Total 1,198 327 3W 303 274 415 207 402 175 Other/Female 28% tI°/a 0°l0 1�°!o t3°/a 0% 0% 59% 50% OtheNMale 22% {i% 11°Io 4°l0 100°1a 0% 0% 41% 50% 8.ArealAge Plateau<60 30% 53°l0 70% 0°fa fl°/a 100% 0% 0% 0% Plateau>_60 19°/u 47% 3Q°Ia 0°!0 �3°/a 0°/u 100°/u 0°/u 0°/a Other<60 32% 0°l0 4% 67°!0 59°Jo 0% 0% 100% 0% Other>_60 18% 0�lo D°fo 33°l0 41°l0 0% 0% 0% 100% 9.Areallncome Plateau<$70,000 20% 46°l0 35�10 0°!0 0°la 37% 47% 0% 0% Plateau>_$70,000 22°/a 54°!u 65°Ia (#°l0 0°fo 63% 53% 0% 0% Other<$70,000 30% 0°l0 (}% 43°!a 44°jo 0% 0% 38% 56% Other>_$70,000 28% tI°/a U�lo 57°l0 �% 0% 0% 62% 44% 10. Precincts Briar 12% 9% 1$°Iu 93°!0 14°fo 19% 6% 10% 19% Brigid 5% 14°lu 5% 0% 4°/u # # # # Daniel 10% {�% Q°fo �'�°jo "��°� 0% 0% 10% 19% Eastwood 10% 4°Io 0°le 13% 18°/a 0% 0% 11% 19% Husky 12% 18°Io 32°/a 0% Q% 33% 12% 0% 0% Ida 5% 23�fo 1$°!0 4'�a 0°Io # # # # Odonnell 4% 18% 9$°!o i}�lo C}°fa # # # # Renhill 4% Q°lo 0°lc 15°fo 12% # # # # Tanner 12% 9% 5°!0 18°!0 1{I°jo 4°/a 12% 18% 7% Tanya 12% 0°!a Q% �{�% 12$/0 0% 0% 10% 12% Valencia 9% {1°{a Q°Io 19% 20% 0% 0% 20% 19% Othe� 4% �°fo �jo�Q �a� 2o�q 7% 6% 1% 2% RT STRATEGIES . Area/lncome F May 3-4,2006 1,500 Target Respondents N plateau<�70,D00 pi�t8au 2 74 OQ� 4theF<$7Q,f300 C)ther 2 7U t�l0 Total 1,198 2A�0 2fi4 35� 335 1.Annexation Area Plate2U 49% 1U(}°/a 1QD% 0°Iu (}"1a Other 51% 4°lo Q% 100°fo 1d0°Io 2. Hierarchal Vote Strong Yes 18% 12% 7% 15°k 25°/a , WeaklLean Yes 18% 20°!a 17°Ic 11°l0 11°!0 �i� Undecided 5% 1fl°!c t}°fs 4°� 4°l0 ', Weak/Lean No 13% '[2% 27°fo 13�lc 11°!0 'I Strong No 46% 46'% 50°I� �7°fo 5Q°Io , 3. Preference II All 18% 10% 14°!0 14°l0 29°/a � Part 13% 1$% 40°!u 16°l0 94°l0 ' None 51% 55� 7?'y� 58°�0 36% ' Undecided 19% 18% 8% 12% 21°l� ' 4. Gender I�I Female 53% d5% 55% 52�0 60°Ca I' Male 47% 55°Jo 45°l0 48'!a 4Q% I 5.Age I�� 18-34 13% 5°l0 13%+ 9°fo 29°l0 35-44 14% 15°/a 20% 1$% 7% 45-59 36% 45°!0 4�°l0 32°!a 39°lc 60+ 38% 35°/u 2�°fo 41°fa 25°l0 6. Income <$30,000 6% �5% €f°fo 25%a fla/o , $30,000-49,999 9% 20°1n 0% 42°/a 4% $50,000-69,999 28% fi5°10 0% 33°fo Q°lo $70,000-89,999 27% U°lo 47% 0% 22%a >_$90,000 31% 0% �3°l0 0°to 78% 7.ArealGender Piateau/Female 25% 55� 43°lo Q% 0°la Plateau/Male 24% 45°10 �7°!0 0% U°!o RT STRATEGIES Areatlncame May 3-4,2006 1,500 Target Respondents N Pla�eau<�TO.� P[ateau�$7a,R0U Other<$7Q.000 tHher�S70,604 Total 1,198 240 264 359 335 Other/Female 28% 43°!0 0% 45% �i6°lo Other/Male 22% fl% 4% 55% 54ojo 8.Area/Age Plateau<60 30% 6�S°In 73a10 Q°lo 0°l0 Plateau>_60 19% �5Q/o 27°Jo 4°/a U°/a Other<60 32% 4°fo Q°la ,�"iJ°lo 75°l0 Other>_60 18% 0°Io (1°ja 41% 25% 9.Arealincome Plateau<$70,000 20% 1flf)°lo 4% Q°lo 0°l0 Plateau>_$70,000 22°/u U°lo 1€!Q°Io 0% 0°!0 Other<$70,000 30% fl°!o U°/a 1Q4�°10 f�°lo Other z$70,000 28% U°/a Q% 0°l0 1U0°la 10. Precincts Briar 12% 2t}°la 5% 16°l0 11°l0 Brigid 5% # # # # Daniel 10% #3%a 0% 13°10 18°l0 EastWood 10% U°fo Ll% 13% 13% Husky 12% 5°Io 35% 0°l0 {3°Ic Ida 5% # #� # # Odonnell 4% # # # # Renhill 4% # # # # Tanner 12% 35°{� 20°la 23% $°la Tanya 12% U% U°lo 3% 13°/u Valencia 9% fl% 0°l0 16% 22°l0 Other 4% 5°l0 10°k 3elo 2°l0 RT STRATEGIES - r � �OO ?�aci��nal Interviewing: May 3-4,2006 C�nuiil�u� RT 5crateg.e� Sample: 1,198 registered voters Poll in targeted areas of King Co. TlioixYa; Rielile,F�arne� �'. Lai�:e Ta�rratice,1r.,Parn,e� Margin of error: +2.75 99 Canal Plaza Center,Suite 400,Alexandria,VA 22314 Ph:(571)721-0201 FINAL RT Strategies King County Annexation IVR Poll Thomas Riehle and Lance Tarrance, Partners Conducted May 3-4, 2006 N = 1,198 registered voters in targeted areas, Margin of Error: + 2.75% All numbers reqresent percentaqes unless otherwise labeled. UNWEIGHTED TOPLINE RESULTS **Caution: These are NOT final results. They are the unweighted results,prior to data analysis. ALL these numbers will change when the results are weighted to reflect the gender,age and geographic distribution of the total population. Do not distribute these results. "* (ASK HALF OF SAMPLE AREA-WIDE) 1 a. This fall voters in your community may be asked to annex to the City of Renton. If the election were today, how would you vote? Yes,to join the City of Renton?Or no,to oppose joining the City of Renton? A�� REGISTERED VoreRs Plateau Rest of Area Yes,join city of Renton......................................... 28 No, oppose joining city of Renton......................... 62 Undecided......................................................... 10 (ASK HALF OF SAMPLE AREA-WIDE) 1 b. This fall voters in your community may be asked to annex to the City of Renton. If the election were today, how would you vote? Yes to join the City of Renton?Or no,to remain in . unincorporated King County? A�� REGISTERED VOTERS Plateau Rest of Area Yes,join city of Renton......................................... 30 No,to remain in unincorporated King County....... 60 Notsure............................................................. 10 (COMBINED RESULTS FOR SPLIT FORM—Q1 a AND Q1 b) 1. This fall voters in your community may be asked to annex to the City of Renton. If the election were today, how would you vote? Yes to join the City of Renton?Or no,to(oppose'oini Renton/remain in unincorporated King County)? A�� REGISTERED VOTERS Plateau Rest of Area Yes,join city of Renton......................................... 29 No,to(oppose joining/remain unincorporated).... 61 Notsure............................................................. 70 � RT Strategies Page 2 � Interviewing: May 3-4,2006 King Co.Annexation 99 Canal Plaza Center,Suite 400,Alexandria,VA 22314 Ph:(571)721-0201 UNWEIGHTED NOT FINAL STRENGTH OF SUPPORT FOR 1a. "JOIN EAST RENTON"QUESTION (ASK HALF OF SAMPLE AREA-WIDE) 1 a. This fall voters in your community may be asked to annex to the City of Renton. If the election were today, how would you vote? Yes,to join the City of Renton?Or no,to oppose joining the City of Renton? A�� REGISTERED VOTERS Plateau Rest of Area Yes,join city of Renton......................................... 28 No,oppose joining city of Renton......................... 62 Undecided......................................................... 10 (IN THIS HALF OF SAMPLE AREA-WIDE,ASKED ONLY OF THOSE WHO ANSWER YES ON Q.1 a) 1 a/2a. Do you think there is a chance that you might vote against joining the city of Renton,or have you definitely decided to support annexation? ALL REGISTERED VOTERS Plateau Rest of Area Sure you will vote to join the city of Renton.......... 53 There is a chance you might vote against joining the City of Renton..................................... 48 (IN THIS HALF OF SAMPLE AREA-WIDE,ASKED ONLY OF THOSE WHO ANSWER NO ON Q.1a) 1 a/2b. Do you think there is a chance that you might vote in favor of joining the city of Renton, or have you definitely decided to oppose annexation? ALL REGISTERED VOTERS Plateau Rest of Area Sure you will vote against joining the city of Rento n.................................................................. 81 There is a chance you might vote to join the City of Renton....................................................... 19 (IN THIS HALF OF SAMPLE AREA-WIDE,ASKED ONLY OF THOSE UNDECIDED ON Q.1a) 1 a/2c. As of now,do you lean more toward voting for or against joining the City of Renton? ALL REGISTERED VOTERS Plateau Rest of Area Lean toward voting to join the city of Renton........ 14 Lean toward voting against joining the City of Renton.................................................................. 36 Completely undecided 50 RT Strategies IVR Poll Project#1010 Any questions—call Thomas Riehle at 571 721 0201 N \' RT Strategies Page 3 Interviewing: May 3-4,2006 King Co.Annexation 99 Canal Plaza Center,Suite 400,Alexandria,VA 22314 Ph:(571)721-0201 UNWEIGHTED NOT FINAL STRENGTH OF SUPPORT FOR 1 b. "REMAIN UNINCORPORATED"QUESTION (ASK HALF OF SAMPLE AREA-WIDE) 1 b. This fall voters in your community may be asked to annex to the City of Renton. If the election were today, how would you vote? Yes to join the City of Renton?Or no,to remain in unincorporated King County? ALL REGISTERED VOTERS Plateau Rest of Area Yes,join city of Renton......................................... 30 No,to remain in unincorporated King County....... 60 Notsure............................................................. 10 (IN THIS HALF OF SAMPLE AREA-WIDE,ASKED ONLY OF THOSE WHO ANSWER YES ON Q.1 b) 1 b/2a. Do you think there is a chance that you might vote no in order to remain in unincorporated King County,or have you definitely decided to support annexation? ALL REGISTERED VOTERS Plateau Rest of Area Sure you will vote to join the city of Renton.......... 50 There is a chance you might vote against joining the City of Renton in order to remain in unincorporated King County................................. 50 (IN THIS HALF OF SAMPLE AREA-WIDE,ASKED ONLY OF THOSE WHO ANSWER NO ON Q.1 b) 1 b/2b. Do you think there is a chance that you might vote in favor of joining the city of Renton, or have you definitely decided to vote no,in order to remain in unincorporated King County? ALL REGISTERED VoreRs Plateau Rest of Area Sure you will vote against joining the city of Renton.................................................................. 78 There is a chance you might vote to join the Cityof Renton....................................................... 22 (IN THIS HALF OF SAMPLE AREA-WIDE,ASKED ONLY OF THOSE UNDECIDED ON Q.1b) 1 b/2c. As of now,do you lean more toward voting for or against joining the City of Renton? ALL REGISTERED Vorerts Plateau Rest of Area Lean toward voting to join the city of Renton........ 25 Lean toward voting against joining the City of Renton.................................................................. 31 Completely undecided 44 RT Strategies IVR Poll Project#1010 Any questions—call Thomas Riehle at 571 721 0201 � v RT Strategies Page 4 Interviewing: May 3-4,2006 King Co.Annexation 99 Canal Plaza Center,Suite 400,Alexandria,VA 22314 Ph:(571)721-0201 UNWEIGHTED NOT FINAL HIERARCHICAL VOTE—COMBINED RESULTS FOR Q.7a/1b AND FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS (COMBINED RESULTS—Q1a AND Q1b—WITH STRENGTH OF SUPPORT AND LEANERS) 2. Hierarchical Vote: ALL REGISTERED VOTERS Plateau Rest of Area Strong Yes........................................................... 18 10 25 Weak/Lean Yes.................................................... 18 20 15 Undecided............................................................ 5 6 4 Weak/Lean No 13 16 12 Strong No 46 48 44 RT Strategies IVR Poll Project#1010 Any questions—call Thomas Riehle at 571 721 0201 �1 ` RT Strategies Page 5 Interviewing: May 3-4,2006 King Co.Annexation 99 Canal Plaza Center,Suite 400,Alexandria,VA 22314 Ph:(571)721-0201 UNWEIGHTED NOT FINAL SPLIT ANNEXATION PROPOSAL(ASKED BY GEOGRAPHY) (ASKED ONLY OF THOSE LIVING IN PLATEAU AREA OF EAST RENTON) 3a. One proposal under consideration would divide unincorporated East Renton into two parts. The plateau area of East Renton, including your immediate neighborhood,would vote to join the City of Renton this Fall, but the rest of the East Renton area would remain unincorporated. Should all of East Renton join the City of Renton?Or should part of East Renton join the City of Renton while part remains unincorporated?Or should all of East Renton remain unincorporated? ALL REGISTERED VoreRs Plateau Rest of Area All of East Renton should join City of Renton................. 10 Part of East Renton should join the City of Renton, while part remains unincorporated................................. 15 All of East Renton should remain unincorporated.......... 65 Notsure....................................................................... 10 (ASKED ONLY OF THOSE LIVING THE REST OF EAST RENTON) 3b. One proposal under consideration would divide unincorporated East Renton into two parts. The plateau area of East Renton would vote to join the City of Renton next year, but the rest of the East Renton area,including your immediate neighborhood,would remain unincorporated. Should all of East Renton join the City of Renton?Or should part of East Renton join the City of Renton while part remains unincorporated?Or should all of East Renton remain unincorporated? ALL REGISTERED VOTERS Plateau Rest of Area All of East Renton should join City of Renton................. 23 Part of East Renton should join the City of Renton, while part remains unincorporated................................. 8 All of East Renton should remain unincorporated.......... 58 Notsure....................................................................... 28 RT Strategies IVR Poll Project#1010 Any questions—call Thomas Riehle at 571 721 0201 n r RT Strategies Page 6 Interviewing: May 3-4,2006 King Co.Annexation 99 Canal Plaza Center,Suite 400,Alexandria,VA 22314 Ph: (571)721-0201 UNWEIGHTED NOT FINAL DEMOGRAPHICS NOTE: Results for demographic questions represent all adulfs unless ofherwise indicated. Finally,just a few questions for statistical purposes only: D1. For research purposes,can you tell me your gendei'? Male................................. 47 Female............................ 53 D2. Please enter the first digit of your age. For example, if you in your 40s, press four. If you are in your sixties, press six. 18-19............................... 1 20-29............................... 2 30-39............................... 16 40-49............................... 15 50-59............................... 26 60-69............................... 28 70-79............................... 9 80-89............................... 3 D4. One last question. Please enter the first digit of your total household income. For example if your household income is$50,000,press five. If you make more than$90,000 per year, press nine. $10,000 to$19,999.......... 2 $20,000 to$29,999 5 $30,000 to$39,999.......... 4 $40,000 to$49,999.......... 6 $50,000 to$59,999.......... 16 $60,000 to$69,999.......... 12 $70,000 to$79,999.......... 14 $80,000 to$89,999.......... 12 $90,000 or more.............. 30 REGION: EAST RENTON Plateau 49 Other 51 RT Strategies IVR Poll Project#1010 Any questions—call Thomas Riehle at 571 721 0201 W E 6th St �' w �0�� I � Q � � � � � L ,C � W 7 N � � �� E 4t St �— — � ��`��. � w th �� S 1 8th St � � 1 8t t St � B. W °' � �d St SE 1 t t. _ N f i T Q I � �� 0D � � � _ _� � ��'��q��I� �� I � � ' E 1 nd t ��-' � SE 13 n t� �' __ ,i � s � W — SE 132nd St E 3 n S o N y .r �� t a �� N . 6 SE 134th t. � 34th St � ' . 134th St — � c � — o � � � i � � I r J � � � L O SE 136th St 3 th t. �� 1 t �,, . � � ��1� � ; . � Q , � � ��Q � W - � �, � - o "' Q � � � � S 9t > N Q > ao o� 1 � 1 � � � ^ SE 140 h St � N 7 � Q � t � n — d � �, � P/ . � I II-7 SE �O 144th t. �, t l S 1 I. � � f �� N � , Q � °' �, � � P � t � Q��'� � E�14 t � 7 � S � f F ✓o�es R i opes � �R fon _ P � i �op/e �alleY HW, r 1 SE J.E. ones Rd � j eS � � SE Re�� es on _ ,U le � � SE Renton—�lu le Valle H r P I ate a u An n e�cati o n o 1200 240° ro o s e d P re s e rv e O u nexation Area P o An p ti'�Y o Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning - - - R@CltOfl Clt�/ LIf111tS 1 : 14400 v/^ �+ ,�s� � Alcx Pietsch,Adm;�,stta�or — � — � Urban Growth Boun ary �� G.Dcl Rosario 14 October 2005 �ti�Y p� CITY OF RENTON �: �- Economic Development,Neighborhoods and � ,� ♦ Strategic Planning Kathy Keolker,Mayor Alex Pietsch,Administrator ��N�O January 31, 2006 Gwendolyn High, CAREAC Chair/Treasurer CARE PO Box 2936 Renton, WA 98056 RE: ANNEXATION ISSUES IN THE EAST RENTON PLATEAU PAA Dear Ms. High: Thank you for your letter of November 16, 2005, to Mayor Keolker regarding the City's authority to decline petitions to annex in areas where there currently is an annexation proposal before the Council and/or voters of the area. She has asked me to respond to this inquiry on her behalf and to also address your request for information expressed at your January 18, 2006, meeting. , First, I will attempt to answer your question about the City's position regarding additional annexation efforts within the Preserve Our Plateau Annexation(POPA) area. Currently, there are no pending annexations before the City that lie within this area. In conversations with the Mayor, she has indicated no interest in allowing petition annexations to be considered until the question of the POPA is resolved by a public vote. While State law (RCW 35A.14.120)requires the City to accept new 10%Direct Petitions to Annex and hold Public Meetings before the City Council on such requests within 60 days, the Administration will not recommend that the City Council authorize the next step in the process— circulation of a 60%Petition. While I believe it is highly unlikely, the City Council does have the ability to authorize the petition's circulation, against the Administration's recommendation, if a majority of the membership was so inclined. If that were to occur, and a 60%Direct Petition to Annex were presented to the City, State Law would require the Council to accept, reject, or modify the boundaries of that annexation. In that instance, the Adrninistration would recommend rejection of the petition as untimely; however, it is the Council's decision. Again, it is extremely unlikely that 1) any annexations would be proposed in this area until after an election, and 2)that the Council would allow an annexation to proceed assuming that an election is eminent. With regard to the questions raised to the Mayor in your January 18th meeting, I submit the following responses on behalf of the Mayor: • At this point, the City also supports and anticipates a September 2006 election date. • The extension of the sewer moratorium is a concern. If further extension is not possible, staff is working internally and with King County to determine a way for Renton 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N ' AHEAD OF THE CURVE �This oaoer contains 50%re�wcied material.30%oost consumer Gwendolyn High January 26,2006 Page 2 development standards to be implemented in the interim prior to the election and the effective date of the annexation. • The question of bonded indebtedness will be presented to the City Council at the Public Meeting on February 13, 2006. If the Council chooses to pursue acceptance of the City's limited bonded indebtedness,we will provide detailed information to you as quickly as possible. • With regard to your Community Planning Effort, and as has been previously discussed, if the Council accepts the Petition to Annex and establishes a date for annexation, the Mayor intends to convene an Annexation Community Task Force. This appointed body will be broadly representative of the residents of the POPA. The Mayor hopes that this group will discuss and make recommendations on many of the issues you have determined to be a part of your Community Planning Effort. This group could serve as a conduit of information to the residents of the area prior to the election and, if the vote is successful, represent the community in the many planning decisions the City will face regarding actual annexation of the area. I hope that your effort can be integrated into the work of the Task Force to avoid redundant and extraneous work. • The geographic data you requested is significant and would involve tremendous staff time to produce. Since many of these topics will be addressed through the Annexation Community Task Force, I hope you are able wait for the infortnation once that process begins. The Mayor and I appreciate your continued dedication to this effort, and we look forward to working with you as the annexation process unfolds. Meanwhile, I hope this letter addresses your concerns. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Sincerely, Alex Pietsch Refenal#06-2006 cc: Kathy Keolker,Mayor . Rebecca Lind,Ptanning Manager Don Erickson,Senior Planner . � ' ��y � ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, U „ � � NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC � � ' PLANNING DEPARTMENT ��N�o� M E M O R A N D U M DATE: January 26, 2006 TO: Randy Corman, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: Kathy Keolker, Mayor FROM: Alex Pietsch, Administrator STAFF CONTACT: Rebecca Lind/Don Erickson SUBJECT: Preserve Our Plateau Annexation— 10% Petition ISSUE: • Should the Council support the proposed annexation of approximately 1,475-acres of the East Renton Plateau at this time by adopting a resolution calling upon King County to hold an election asking residents whether they support or oppose annexation; RECOMMENDATION: The Administration is recommending that Council: Pass a resolution accepting the 10%Notice of Intent petition calling for an election on the proposed annexation in the fall of 2006, but not requiring residents to vote on: • the question of the simultaneous adoption of new zoning, or • the proposition that all property within the area annexed, shall, upon annexation, be assessed and taxed at the same rate as property within the annexing city to pay all or any portion of that city's outstanding indebtedness approved by voters or incurred prior to or existing at the date of annexation. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: On November 15, 2005 the City received a 10%Notice of Intent to Commence Annexation Proceedings petition from annexation proponents calling upon the Council to hold a public meeting within 60 days on the issue of annexation. The Notice of Intent petition specifically asks the Council to decide whether the City will accept or reject the proposed annexation, and, if it supports it, whether it wishes to ask voters to consider the simultaneous adoption of proposed zoning and whether it wishes to ask voters to consider the proposition of that all property within the area annexed, shall, upon annexation, be h:\ednsp\paa\annexations\preserve our plateau\issue paper#3.doc r Preserve Our Plateau Annexation Issue Paper Page 2 of 6 February 7,2006 assessed and taxed at the same rate as property within the annexing city to pay all or any portion of that city's outstanding indebtedness approved by voters or incurred prior to or existing at the date of annexation. King County Elections and Recards certified the 10% Notice of Intent petition, submitted with more than 390 signatures and needing 320 signatures of registered voters to be valid, on December 19, 2005. The proposed public hearing on February 13, 2006 is within the mandated 60-day period called for under state law. Resolution: Under State law, the City is required to adopt a resolution, within 60 days of certification of the petition, notifying petitioners of its approval or rejection of their call for an election on the issue of annexation. If Council approves a resolution initiating an election the resolution shall state the estimated number of voters residing in the area as well as that the City will pay the cost of the annexation election. Outstandin� Indebtedness Issue: One of the issues that need to be addressed includes that of the City's outstanding indebtedness and whether property owners should be asked to assume a proportionate share of this. The City's remaining outstanding bonded indebtedness at this time is the Senior Housing bond for Hauser Terrace, which is expected to retire in 2009. The City currently collects 0.7861 cents per$1,000 of assessed valuation to pay off this bond. The estimated cost to the City, if it were to assume the amount that would normally be collected from the 1,475-acre annexation area, is estimated to be between $62,285 and $86,143, depending on when the area actually comes into the City and how early in 2009 the bond is retired. It amounts to about $27 per average household per year until it is expected to be retired a year or so after the annexation area is expected to brought into the City, assuming voters approve it. As recent elections have shown because voters often misconstrue the amount of bonded indebtedness they are being asked to take on they have rejected the proposition asking them whether they wish to assume a city's preexisting indebtedness when asked. Because such measures must be approved by a super majority of 60%rather than the simple majority of 50% required for annexation itself, and, because the remaining amount of the City's senior housing bonds that would be collected from this area is estimated to be less than $80,000 for the 15 months or so between when the annexation area comes into the City and when the bond expires, the Administration is recommending that the proposition of assuming a proportionate share of the City's outstanding indebtedness not be placed on the ballot. ESTIMATED BONDED INDEBTEDNESS AMOUNTS YEAR Senior POPA Assessed Annual Annual Est. Post Hausing Value**** Tax from Tax/Household�" Annexation Bond Rate POPA Loss if Tax Not Collected 2006 0.07861 per $505,000,000 $39,698 $24.81 N/A $1,000 2007 0.07861 per $561,000,000** $44,100 $25.91 $14,569 Sept- $1,000 Dec h:\ednsp\paa\annexations\preserve our plateau\issue paper#3.doc Preserve Our Plateau Annexation Issue Paper Page 3 of 6 February 7,2006 2008 0.07861 per $617,000,000*** $48,502 $26.89 $47,716 $1,000 2009 0.07861 per $622,000,000 $48,895 $27.10 $23,858 Jan- $1,000 June TOTAL $86,143 *Assumes 1,600 households in 2006 R-$Sewer Certi�'icates #of **Assumes '/2 of R-8 density sewer certificates exercised Evendell 75 DU in 2007 Hamilton 23 DU ***Assumes all of R-8 density sewer certificates pietrie 46 DU exercised by 2008 ****Assumes AV increases 1%a year Highlands 60 DU Assumes new home value of$500,000 T�TAI� 204 DU Boundary Review Board Objectives: The 1,475-acre annexation area is within Renton's Potential Annexation Area(PAA) and on initial examination appears to comply with relevant Boundary Review Board objectives, including having reasonable boundaries,preservation of natural neighborhoods and communities, creation and preservation of logical service areas, annexation to cities of unincorporated areas,which are urban in character. In this case, over 3/4s of the area's boundary is defined by the Urban Growth Boundary. The proposed annexation also includes existing neighborhoods without splitting them. Areas where current annexations are underway were excluded as was the Maplewood Heights Addition and the Maplewood Subdivision south of SE 138rh Street. Fire District No. 25: In terms of logical service areas the proposed annexation is within Renton's designated Sewer Service Area and the City currently provides fire prevention and suppression services under contract to Fire District No. 25, which it would take over upon annexation. Fire District No. 25 currently provides service to over 95% of the proposed annexation area. State law states provides that when an annexed area encompasses 60% ar more of a district's assessed value, it may require the annexing city to assume responsibility for serving the remaining portion of the district at a reasonable fee. The proposed annexation would only comprise 51% of the district's current assessed value and include the residence of one of its commissioners. As a result, the 60% rule is not triggered(see Exhibit X,Fire District 25 Map). Because the City already has a contractual agreement to provide fire service to the district through December 2007, the only change will be that the absolute dollar amount of taxes collected by District 25 and paid to the City will be reduced, but the City will be recovering these lost dollars as a result of the annexed area being added to its tax base. Basically, Renton's general property tax will replace the lost intergovernmental revenue it was receiving from Fire District 25. Parks: h:\ednsp\paa\annexations\preserve our plateau\issue paper#3.doc a Preserve Our Plateau Annexation Issue Paper Page 4 of 6 February 7,2006 Because the County has extensive park land holdings in the proposed annexation area, and because the City is in negotiations with the County on the transference of these lands to the City upon annexation, the cost to acquire future park lands to serve area residents is expected to be modest. These County owned park lands include Maplewood Park, Maplewood Heights Park, the Cedar to Sammamish Trail site south of Fire Station 16, and the remaining May Creek parcels. Together, these properties account for 56.9 acres (see Exhibit XX,Parks Map). Fiscal Impact: Initial analysis indicates that annexation itself and the Maplewood Heights neighborhood, if included, would result in a positive cash flow to the City even though an estimated 31 additional full-time employees (FTE) would be needed to maifztain the City's current level of service throughout the 1,475-acre annexation area. 11.2 FTE's would be in Public Works, 8.3 are in Community Services, and 6.9 are iya Police. Fiyzance would receive 2.0 FTE's, Economic Development and Planning would receive 1.5, ayzd Administration would receive one.(to be redo�ze based upon �zew Berk 8c Associates data) The area currently has an estimated 1,630 dwellings with a combined assessed value of over$505 million. There also are an estimated 216 acres, 109 acres of which are vacant, and 107 acres of which are redevelopable. It is estimated that another 1,060 dwelling units could be built over the next ten years, resulting in a total of 2,690 dwelling units in the annexation area with an estimated population of 5,852 people. ESTIMATED VACANT AND REDEVELOPABLE ACREAGE . ZONES ACRES EXISTING UNITS NEW LTNITS R-4,Vacant 109 0 374 R-4,Redevelo able 107 94 686 TOTALS 216 94 1,060 ESTIMATED EXISTING AND FUTURE POPULATION YEARS Eausting Units Estimated * -�j� 5�� '�� Po ulat�on 2006 1,600 3,520 ,{� 2006-2016 1,060 2,332 �� 4-s/r��{ 2016 2,660 5,852 = oi'� � °J I ;tl;fSf�1 y *2.2 Persons per Unit ' Using 2006 figures in the City's Fiscal Impact Analysis model, it would appear that if the 1,475-acre area were brought into the City today, there would be an initial deficit of $7,783 and at full-development a modest, for this size of an area, surplus of$189,937 in today's dollars. The model includes City costs for contracted services such as the public defender and jail, court and legal administrative costs, parks and road maintenance costs, police and fire costs, and surface water maintenance costs. Some surface water capital improvement costs have also been included. h:\ednsp\paa\annexations\preserve our plateau\issue paper#3.doc ' Preserve Our Plateau Annexation Issue Paper Page 5 of 6 February 7,2006 Outstanding Indebtedness Issue: One of the issues that need to be addressed includes that of the City's outstanding indebtedness and whether property owners should be asked to assume a proportionate share of this. The City's remaining outstanding bonded indebtedness at this time is the Senior Housing bond for Hauser Terrace, which is expected to retire in 2009. The City currently collects 0.7861 cents per$1,000 of assessed valuation to pay off this bond. The estimated cost to the City, if it were to assume the amount that would normally be collected from the 1,475-acre annexation area, is estimated to be between $62,285 and $86,143, depending on when the area actually comes into the City and how early in 2009 the bond is retired. It amounts to about $27 per average household per year until it is expected to be retired a year ar so after the annexation area is expected to brought into the City, assuming voters approve it. As recent elections have shown because voters often misconstrue the amount of bonded indebtedness they are being asked to take on they have rejected the proposition asking them whether they wish to assume a city's preexisting indebtedness when asked. Because such measures must be approved by a super majority of 60% rather than the simple majority of 50%required for annexation itself, and, because the remaining amount of the City's senior housing bonds that would be collected from this area is estimated to be less than $80,000 for the 15 months or so between when the annexation area comes into the City and when the bond expires, the Administration is recommending that the proposition of assuming a proportionate share of the City's outstanding indebtedness not be placed on the ballot. ESTIMATED BONDED INDEBTEDNESS AMOUNTS YEAR Senior POPA Assessed Annual Annual Est. Post Housing Value**** Tax from Ta�Household* Annexation Bond Rate POPA Loss if Tax Not Collected 2006 0.07861 per $505,000,000 $39,698 $24.81 N/A $1,000 2007 0.07861 per $561,000,000** $44,100 $25.91 $14,569 Sept- $1,000 Dec 2008 0.07861 per $617,000,000*** $48,502 $26.89 $47,716 $1,000 2009 0.07861 per $622,000,000 $48,895 $27.10 $23,858 Jan- $1,000 June TOTAL $86,143 *Assumes 1,600 households in 2006 R-$Sewer Certificates #of _ **Assumes %z of R-8 density sewer certificates exercised Evendell 75 DU in 2007 Hamilton 23 DU ***Assumes all of R-8 density sewer certificates Pietrie 46 DU exercised by 2008 ****Assumes AV increases 1%a year Highlands 60 DU Assumes new home value of$500,000 TOTAL 204 DU h:\ednsp\paa\annexations\preserve our plateau\issue paper#3.doc s Preserve Our Plateau Annexation Issue Paper Page 6 of 6 February 7,2006 Zonin Ig ssue: Another issue pertains to zoning for the proposed 1,475-acre annexation area. Under the Growth Management Act of 1990 cities, upon annexation, are required to adopt simultaneous zoning for the area being brought in, consistent with their comprehensive land use plan. Although Renton's Comprehensive Plan was amended in November 2004 to allow future zoning in this area at a maximum density of 4 units per net acre, rather than the former land use designation which allowed 8 units per net acre, the area has not yet been prezoned. Staff is recommending that prezoning take this place this summer prior to a fall election. Prezoning will require the holding of at least two public hearings on future zoning for the area. Since prezoning would, to a large extent negate the need to decide on future zoning, there is little gained by putting it on the ballot. As a result, the Administration is recommending that this issue also not be placed on the ballot. Effectuation Issue: A final issue pertains to when the City would actually effectuate the annexation assuming voters approve it. Because of the size of this annexation and the need to coordinate closely with the County on the transference of responsibilities for police, fire,parks, land use permitting, street maintenance, change of addresses and street names, and the like, as well as the need to conduct a special census for the area, staff are recommending that sufficient time elapse between when the election is certified and when the area is brought into the City. Staff believe this process could take anywhere between six months to a year to wark out any necessary interlocal agreements with the County,put in place necessary staff, and have relevant operational changes in place prior to the effective date of annexation. A special blue ribbon Advisory Committee has been proposed that would help facilitate this process and the County has offered transition funding in the form of $1.15 million in REET together with $600,000 CX funds, half of which would be paid upon certification of the election, and half upon the effective date of the annexation. CONCLUSION: The proposed 1,475-acre annexation appears to comply with most relevant BRB objectives including reasonable boundaries, logical service areas, coherent neighborhoods, and the annexation of areas that are urban in character. That portion of Fire District 25 within the annexation area would be taken over by the City. However, because the City provides service to the District under contract no change of service is anticipated. Similarly, school district boundaries do not change as a result of annexation, so school assignments should not change. Fiscally, it appears that with full development in 2016 there might be a modest surplus to the City. Because the annexation area is within Renton's PAA and it is more efficient to annex larger areas than smaller ones, and because larger annexations allow the City to manage growth in a more rational way, and,because at full development there appears to be a positive cash flow, the Preserve Our Plateau Annexation would be in the best interest of the City of Renton. As a result, the registered voters therein should be allowed to vote on whether they wish to come into the City at this time as part of a larger annexation or remain in unincorporated King County, continuing and be brought in incrementally through smaller annexations. h:\ednsp\paa\annexations\preserve our plateau\issue paper#3.doc ! ��y � ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, U �; � � NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC � � ' PLANNING DEPARTMENT ��N�o� M E M O R A N D U M DATE: January 26, 2006 TO: Randy Corman, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: Kathy Keolker, Mayor FROM: Alex Pietsch, Administrator STAFF CONTACT: Rebecca Lind/Don Erickson SUBJECT: Preserve Our Plateau Annexation— 10% Petition ISSUE: • Whether the Council wishes to support the proposed annexation of approximately 1,475-acres of the East Renton Plateau at this time by adopting a resolution calling upon King County to hold an election asking residents whether they support or oppose annexation; . If the Council chooses to support the proposed POP Annexation at this time, whether it wishes to require properties owners within the annexation area to assume their prorated share of the City's outstanding indebtedness; • Whether the Council wishes to defer the question of zoning until public hearings on this issue can first be held; and, • If the election for annexation is successful, whether the Council wishes to defer implementation to at least August 2008 to allow sufficient time for transference of responsibilities between the City and the County and the hiring of new employees? RECOMMENDATION: The Administration is recommending that Council: Pass a resolution accepting the 10%Notice of Intent petition calling for an election on the proposed annexation and, Call upon King County to schedule a special election in the fall of 2006 that would allow registered voters within the proposed annexation area to vote either for annexation or against annexation. or Call upon King County to schedule a special election in the fall of 2006 that would allow registered voters within the proposed annexation area to vote either for annexation or h:\ednsp\paa\annexations\preserve our plateau\issue paper.doc Addressee Name Page 2 of 3 ', Date of Memo against annexation as well as vote for or against accepting the City's outstanding bonded indebtedness. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: On November 15, 2005 the City received a 10%Notice of Intent to Commence Annexation Proceedings petition from annexation proponents calling upon the Council to hold a public meeting within 60 days on the issue of annexation. Specifically, the petition asked the Council to decide whether it wanted to support or reject the proposed annexation, and if it supported it, whether it wished to require residents to vote on assuming their proportional share of the City's outstanding indebtedness, and,whether or not it wished to ask voters to vote on proposed future zoning for the area. Under State law the City is also required to adopt a resolution within 60 days of certification of the petition notifying petitioners of its approval or rejection of the proposed action. The 10%Notice of Intent petition, submitted with more than 390 signatures and needing 320 signatures of registered voters to be certified, was certified by King County on December 19, 2005. The proposed public hearing on February 13, 2006 is within the mandated 60-day period called for under state law. The 1,475-acre annexation area is within Renton's Potential Annexation Area and on initial examination appears to comply with relevant Boundary Review Board objectives, including having reasonable boundaries,preservation of natural neighbarhoods and communities, creation and preservation of logical service areas, annexation to cities of unincorporated areas,which are urban in character. In this case, over 3/4s of the area's boundary is defined by the Urban Growth Boundary. The proposed area also includes existing neighborhoods without splitting them. Areas where current annexations are underway were excluded as was Maplewood Heights Addition and the Maplewood Subdivision south of SE 138rh Street. In terms of logical service areas the area is within Renton's designated Sewer Service Area and the City currently provides fire prevention and suppression under contract to Fire District No. 25,which it would take over. Fire District No. 25 currently provides service to over 95% of the proposed annexation area. Initial analysis indicates that annexation itself would result in a positive cash flow to the City even though an estimated 31 additional full time employees would be needed to serve the area at the City's current level of service. The area currently has an estimated 1,650 dwellings with a combined assessed value of over$505 million. There also are an estimated 650 acres in %z acre or larger parcels that could be developed at higher densities than they currently are. Using 2006 figures in the City's Fiscal Impact Analysis model, it would appear that if the 1,475-acre area were brought in today, there would be a modest $86,000 surplus and, at full-development, this would increase to $301,00 annually. One of the issues that needs to be addressed includes that of the City's outstanding indebtedness and whether property owners should be asked to assume a proportionate share of this. The City's remaining outstanding bonded indebtedness at this time is the Hauser Senior Housing bond, which is expected to retire in early 2009. It amounts to about $16.00 per average household until it is retired a year or so after the annexation area is actually brought into the City. h:\ednsp\paa�annexations\preserve our plateau\issue paper.doc Addressee Name Page 3 of 3 , Date of Memo Because voters often misconstrue the amount of bonded indebtedness they are being asked to take on, because in recent annexation elections elsewhere in the County where the proposition of assuming a city's preexisting indebtedness was rejected at the polls, because such measures must be approved by a super majority of 60%rather than the simple majority of 50%required for annexation itself, and,because the remaining amount of the City's senior housing bonds that would be collected from this area is estimated to be less than $60,000 for the 15 months or so between when the annexation area actually comes into the City and when the bond expires, the Administration is recommending that this issue (not or be)placed on the ballot with this annexation. Another issue pertains to zoning for the proposed 1,475 acre annexation area. Under the Growth Management Act of 1990 cities, upon annexation, are required to adopt simultaneous zoning for the area being brought in, consistent with their comprehensive land use plan. Because the area has not yet been prezoned, staff are recommending that voters not be asked to vote on future zoning when they vote on annexation. Although the area is designated Residential Low Density on the City's Comprehensive Plan and would be zoned R-4, four units per net acre, at least two public hearings are required before the area could be prezoned. We believe the best time to conduct such public hearings would between the time residents vote and the area is actually brought into the City. A final issue pertains to when the City would actually effectuate the annexation assuming voters approve it. Because of the size of this annexation and the need to coordinate closely with the County on the transference of responsibilities for police, fire, parks, land use, permitting, street maintenance, and the like, as well as the requirement to hold public hearings on future zoning, change addresses and street names, and conduct a special census for the area, staff are recommending that this annexation not be brought into the City immediately after the election. It is believed this would provide sufficient time to work out any necessary interlocal agreements with the County,put in place necessary staff, and have relevant operation changes in place prior to the effective date of annexation. Also, a special Blue Ribbon Committee has been proposed that would facilitate this process and the County has offered transition funding in the form of$1.15 million in CVX funds and another$600,000 in road funds, if the annexation is successful. CONCLUSION: The proposed annexation appears to comply with most relevant BRB objectives including reasonable boundaries, logical service areas, coherent neighborhoods, and annexation of areas that are urban in character. In addition, it also appears that with full development there might be a modest surplus to the City. The amount of indebtedness that property owners within the annexation area would be required to pay(until the City's senior housing bonds are retired in early 2009) is estimated to be about$60,000. Because area is within Renton's PAA and it is more efficient to bring in a larger annexation rather than a series of smaller ones, and because at full development there apparently would be a positive cash flow to the City, the Administration does support this annexation. h:\ednsp\paa\annexations\preserve our plateau\issue paper.doc r' .� PRESERVE OUR PLATEAU ANNEXATION FISCAL ANALYSIS SHEET • Units Po ulation AV Existin dev. 1,650 3795 $505,000,000 Full dev. 3,730 8579 $1,220,000,000 Assumptions: 2.3 persons/household $185,000 AV/existing unit $500,000 AV/new SF home FtEvsriuES:.::;... ; Total revenues Existin Full Rate Existing :;?$2;�9�;37:0:��: Re ular lev $1,589,957 $3,841,085 3.14843 Full::;:'$5;�1:3;27�;7(�: Excess lev $95,904 $95,904 0.07861 State shared revenues Rate ( er ca Existin Full Liquor tax $3.93 $14,914.35 $33,715.47 Li uor Board rofits $7.41 $28,120.95 $63,570.39 Gas tax- unrestricted $23.69 $89,903.55 $203,236.51 MVET $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Cam er excise $0.75 $2,846.25 $6,434.25 Criminal 'ustice $0.22 $834.90 $1,887.38 Total $136,620.00 $308,844.00 Miscellaneous revenues Rate Existin Full Real estate excise* $48.57 $184,323.15 $416,682.03 Utilit tax"* $133.20 $219,780.00 $496,836.00 Surface Water Utilit $199.80 $3,530.00 Fines &forfeits* $17.53 $66,526.35 $150,389.87 Total $470,829.30 $1,067,437.90 * Per capita ** Per housing unit-based on $2,220 annual utility billing @ 6%tax rate �Q��:::::::::::::: Total ongoing costs Per ca ita Existin Full Existing :;;;$2:;�Q7;1;��;05: Contracted Services Full;:::;`$5;�1;1;;9Q3'06: Alcohol $0.19 $721.05 $1,630.01 Public Defender $4.68 $17,760.60 $40,149.72 Jail $8.56 $32,485.20 $73,436.24 Subtotal $50,966.85 $115,215.97 Court/le al/admin. $66.92 $253,961.40 $574,106.68 Parks maintenance* $14.90 $56,545.50 $127,827.10 Police $276.89 $1,050,797.55 $2,375,439.31 Surface Water O & M $3,808.00 $8,539.00 Road maintenance`* N/A $159,843.75 $285,781 Fire*"" $1.25 $631,250.00 $1,525,000.00 Total $2,207,173.05 $5,011,909.06 *See Sheet Parks FIA '`''See Sheet Roads FIA '""` Rate per$1,000 of assessed valuation (FD#25 contract) Net fiscal impact Existing ::::::::$8&;137i�0 Ful I::::::::$301:;�6'I:;�� ;Qn�;tlme`:tx7StS�::Parks acquisition &development(from Sheet Parks FIA): $2,235,682.20 Parks Development Oniy $1,075,363.14 Other one-time costs: .................... Total one-time costs: :::::::$1:Q4;86f;20: Revised 8-29 per Finance Memo • � y ' ROADS MAINTENANCE CALCULATION SHEET FOR SCENARIO A Zone AREA Linear feet R-4 650 0 100750 (assumes 155 linear ft/ac) R-5 0 0 0 (assumes 150 linear ft/ac) R-6 0 0 0 (assumes 150 linear fUac) R-8 0 R-8 0 R-8 0 R-8 0 R-8 0 R-8 0 0 (assumes 145 linear ft/ac) R-10 0 0 0 (assumes 140 linear ft/ac) 100750 Estimated total linear feet of new roadway Existing 825 825 127875 Total linear feet of existing roadway $159,843.75 Annual cost for existing roadways Total 228625 Total estimated linear feet of roadway at full development $285,781 Annual roadway maintenance cost at full develop. Revised 8-29-03 per Finance Memo , t � j , PARKS ACQUISTION AND MAINTENANCE COST CALCULATION SHEET Needs: CARLO ANNEXATION Acquisition of land for new neighborhood &community park Development of new neighborhood &community parks Maintenance of neighborhood &community parks Assumptions: $60,000 per acre for land acquistion $125,000 per acre for development(both neighborhood & community parks) $6,000 per acre to maintain neighborhood parks $7,000 per acre to maintain community parks 1.2 acres/1,000 for neighborhood park (LOS in Comprehensive Park Plan) 1.1 acres/1,000 for community park (LOS in Comprehensive Park Plan) 7,038 population after 10 years (projected growth) 3060 housing units after 10 years (projected growth) $530.76 per single family unit mitigation fees 1430 New single family units Per capita annual and one-time costs: One-time Costs: Acquisition: Neighborhood: 1 " 1.2/1000 '` $60,000 = $72.00 Community: 1 * 1.1I1000 ` $60,000 = $66.00 Development: Neighborhood: 1 * 1.2/1,000 " $125,000= $150.00 Community: 1 " 1.1/1,000 " $125,000= $137.50 Total one-time costs: $425 per capita or $2,994,669.00 Mitigation fees: New units "$530.76 = $758,986.80 Acquisition & development costs minus mitigation fees: $2,235,682.20 Ongoing costs : (1 * 1.2/1,000 *$6,000) + (1 * 1.1/1,000 *$7,000)_ $14.90 (park maintenance) On oin costs Maintenance Cost : $104,866.20 Page 1 of 1 . Donald Erickson - Issues for POPA ;:„a�,�'s^�.aa.��A'�a'�'�z.;iv:�:.e§;�n� �::�&�7.�K:�;:'ld:�%±�5'd?a<<'is"i:.i �. .w.,.,-:.a..:vx..:�:.�::t�.'�� ,...e.;�;�;e. ,_ .n.�5.•a• .r..y�;�_. __.,nG�:a� .... .... .,��.. , From: Rebecca Lind To: Erickson, Donald Date: 01/19/2006 11:24 AM Subject: Issues for POPA Bonded indebtedness Fire District Address changes Street lighting Parks transfer Trails Pre-zoning Cost implications of effective date Transition from King County Development regs/sewer moratorium Staffing up Berk estimates 31 FTE (6.9 police) for entire area-- need proportional analysis based on POPA boundary Effective date of annexation and cost of waiting until 8/07 for effective date file://C:�Documents and Settings\derickson�L,ocal Settings\Temp\GW}00OO1.HTM O1/19/2006 POPA ISSUES Election related issues. 1. Probable annexation timing. a. Likely earliest election in September, 2006 b. Likely earliest effectuation date as summer 2007 2. Probably cost of election to City around $5,600. Transition related issues. 1. Increased City staffing. a. Estimated XX new employees. b. Housing of new employees at estimated cost of$5,000 per employee 2. Transitioning service providers a. County Sheriffs Department b. DDES c. KC Parks d. Fire District No. 25 and Fire District No. 10 e. KC Road Services Division 3. Interlocal Agreements? 4. Prezoning for area, including at least two public hearings held at least 30 days apart. 5. Notification of residents and property owners, address changes, and changes of street names and signage (probably will need more than normal 30-day period) 6. Special census, hiring of census takers. Fiscal related issues. 1. Whether City wants to require residents to vote on agreeing to accept their fair share of the City's outstanding indebtedness (general obligation bonds for Hauser Terrace)? a. Remaining life of bonds is estimated to be less than three years. b. Fiscal impact of not collecting debt within proposed annexation area is less than$40,000 per year, or+$80,000. c. If outstanding indebtedness is placed on the ballot, it must be approved by at least 60% of those voting and the turnout must represent at least 40%of those voting in the last general election. 2. Estimated annual fiscal impact of annexation. a. Fiscal analysis POPA Issue Paper 2 O 1/19/2006 i. Parks acquisition and development ii. Roads maintenance iii. Surface water treatment and maintenance Other 1. Planning oversight committee 2. Tree retention provisions 3. SE 128th/NE 4`h Street Improvements Page 2 of 2 . comparison related? It seems that with the certification of our petition, you guys may have some new procedural constraints, so let me know what is possible. I REALLY don't want a Klahanie situation to happen here, so I need to understand teh nitty-gritty on this inside-out-and-upside down. THANKS AGA1N! g ----Original Message Follows---- From: "Karen Reed" <kreedconsult@comcast.net> To: ""Gwendolyn High' "' <gwendolynhigh@hotmail.com> CC: "'Alexander Pietsch"' <Apietsch@ci.renton.wa.us>,"'Hall Walker"' <hall.walker@metrokc.gov>,"'Benson, Elissa"' <Elissa.Benson@METROKC.GOV> Subject: FW: Renton Tax numbers from the public meetings Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 18:12:19 -0800 Hi, Gwen, --Per your question, it appears that what we used at the public meetings did include the bonded indebtedness- -----Original Message----- From: Hall Walker [mailto:hall.walker@metrokc.gov] Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 4:18 PM To: Karen Reed Cc: 'Benson, Elissa' Subject: Re: Renton Tax numbers from the public meetings Hi Karen, In 2005, here are Renton's tax levy numbers. Regular: 3.14843 GO Bond: 0.07861 TOTAL: 3.22704 We used the total number(3.22704) in our property tax calculations. Based on the median assessed value of$230,000 that we used,the GO Bond portion comes to about $18.08. This amount is INCLUDED in the totals on our worksheet as part of the property tax paid under Renton's jurisdiction. Let me know if you have more questions! Hall file://C:�Documents and Settings\derickson�L,ocal Settings\Temp\GW}OOOOl.HTM Ol/04/2006 Page 1 of 1 • Rebecca Lind - Issues for POPA � �:,�, � From: Rebecca Lind / �� ; �' To: Erickson, Donald �.'`: �' Date: 1/19/2006 11:24 AM '"""""�� W� . � , Subject: Issues for POPA `j � �f ;�� __-,------_.__.____...__..._.___....._._________.._._..._. ___.___.__._ _�.�_._ - --- _.�_.____..______.___.___ , � � -.' � Bonded indebtedness � - — FireDistrict �. �� r�,�,,=�{�r- <w .c��.�{ '�� J� t, L�. �� Address changes �� ' Street lighting � ` � Parks transfer � �Trails% ,�� ' � . #P�re-zoning �`� ��' ; �" ..•��;;,1:�-�� !,�.�,�r�= ", "�. '`' *e,� I:�°, Cost implications of effective date � `� _�. '� ^'� P` � , ,� , �:,�� ._,.�.....—•.----�---�` ��,, /,,, :�� 1�:'`;'.�,.,.'�;-�',� ,�',!:�C,�'�'%:f ,� � •Transition from King County ---�� '"""��'� "" ✓ �;�;� , ��` :;� ."�."� r��!r�, Development regs/sewer moratorium Staffing up Berk estimates 31 FTE (6.9 police) for entire area-- need proportional analysis based on POPA boundary Effective date of annexation and cost of waiting until 8/07 for effective date . � � � �� i� �� f1 �.��r�� 2 Y�� '. �;;�' � ��;� G'�/ � . .�: ; � � � J� .-� �-� ,, �; ; ' � : , . .� '.�� `'+h ,; '" � �;� r� , �, . / f � '��. ,� a;�� / f �1'l•!��'��'�^ Y� `� '"..., � /�j �J1 �..w��1 ! 1 � � �,/'.��.� �, .� / ,�'p ;:r �,:•,�^�r' j t. G� / �1. �.�" s, ��l ' W` ''t 1 ._� ,_. � r .;f'�,%r?�� .,f�,x fr'.�`,Y� �p'�� :��. , �� '�` 1 i 7 } .�_'r "' � / �' _-�+�R�� f'' --'—q�. .. . _ 3,/7�j �" .e_� ,,,.j ��,+J ...��ji; / 1/'r9/!� },j.�,',✓ `i „I/� 9,}f , u! i.'..�5 / ! �Y L''.G''` .a ,('y';f. �*, y r ' /tt` �� /�1 � ,�''�,y�,,.� ,�:��.-��J :� �' F � ��: ��r. �; ' �� i e t" �'f �`'�� file://C:�Documents and Settings�rlind�I.oca1 Settings\Temp\GW}00002.HTM 1/19/2006 . � �;f �. `,��ns' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell . ��on Committee � �►,w�►seoss �pdu_,nsiphbors�hotrnail.com � �, Ml�y�pr Kathy Keokler GtEy of Renton 10b5 South Grady Way RBnton WA 98055 January 18,2006 �� _ Preserve Our Plateau Annexation Effort Status Report � � o Our 10%Petition signatures have been certified sufficient by King County _�� j., o We request a later election date and suggest September o The additional time will allow CAREAC to continue to build solid support for annexation,and o Allow staff and the community to make progress toward Council adoption of the planned legislative updates to be effective at the annexation election date. C,n,�� o If a September election date is workable, we also foresee the need to again extend the �,Q y�"- Sewer Extension Moratorium.Will this be possible? L �yl! o We request waiver of the requirement to vote to accept outstanding bonded indebtedness �� o If a waiver is not feasible, we request most precise data for intense community education �� efforts. o We don't want a Klahanie situation repeat! Community Planning Efforts Status Report o We have a large scale Community Planning Effort this year: o Monthly public meetings have been scheduled o Currently outlined to address: • Vital Character and Environmental Components ■ Transportation Elements ■ Public Space and Activities ■ Utility Systems—Water(full lifecycle) o Under each subject area, analysis and report will be structured by these questions: ■ What is good and should be preserved? ■ What is bad and should be fixed? ■ What is at risk and should be protected? ■ What is missing and should be created? o Copies of Work Plans would be very helpful in allowing us to align our efforts to the current Strategic Planning, Parks and other departments'2006 Work Plans for legislative update o Maps based on the Map Spec Request submitted to Strategic Planning staff would be extremely helpful in our planning effort o How may we correctly interact with and submit the results of our Community Planning Effort to the Planning Commission and Planni�g Committee? o BTW... there is extremely strong support of the proposed Tree Retention Ordinance 60%Petition to Annex Inquiry of November 16 Status Request o What is Renton's policy in regard to our previously submitted inquiry? 1 s � p' , . t ' �t Fxus Area, the following questions will be considered and answers proposed: . ;, 1, What is good and should be preserved? ': �. Wh�t is bad and should be fixed? " ' �, What is at risk and should be protected? �� , What is missing and should be created? �c `�� Environmental Character and Vital Components Q 1t�8ntify natural features such as conservation easements, streams, sensitive areas, wooded areas, wildlife habitat etc. � To facilitate discussion and identification it would be most helpful to have a map with the following datasets: 1. Current aerial photo 2. Streets 3. Parcel size(color coded by size)to indicate development potential and potential conservation value 4. Comprehensive Plan Designation (potential zoning) 5. Urban Growth Boundary 6. Parks, easements and all publicly owned properties 7. Sensitive areas Transportation Elements ❑ Identify significant features such as main roads, problem intersections,etc. It may be useful to think of these features in several classes- i.e. Arterial, Connector and Internal Neighborhood ❑ To facilitate discussion and identification it would be most helpful to have a map with the following datasets: 1. Streets 2. Parks, easements and all publicly owned properties 3. Metro-current and planned service 4. I-405 Corridor Plan potential project areas 5. NE 4th Corridor Plan potential project areas 6. Location of traffic lights, signs and turnlanes 7. Representative traffic counts at key intersections 8. King County High Accident Locations Public Space ❑ Identify significant features such as parks, easements,and all publicly owned properties 0 To facilitate discussion and identification it would be most helpful to have a map with the following datasets: 1. Streets 2. Parks, easements and all publicly owned properties 3. Parcel size (color coded by size)to indicate development potential and potential conservation value Water Svstems ❑ List significant features such as streams, wetlands, aquifers, sewer systems, wells, water sources, surface water drainage facilities. ❑ To facilitate discussion and identification it would be most helpful to have a map with the following datasets: 1. Streets 2. Sensitive areas (wetlands, streams, aquifer recharge zones, groundwater susceptible to contamination areas, etc.) 3. Drainage Complaints 4. Drainage infrastructure(wells, ditches, culverts, ponds) by type and current condition 5. Drainage Basins 6. Septic failures (may be problematic for privacy reasons?) 7. Water District 90 asset inventory 8. Renton Sewer Dept. asset inventory 9. Renton Sewer Dept. current system extension projects 10. Renton Sewer Dept. long range planned system extension .» S ',.3 . - , . . ;i"" � e. ,.�_- - . � ,_ -� _� � � 4-� � • � . : �w �. M F�L7 Csl} �t� � .. , , .. .. ... . � g .�, tt¢ ` , �€ . ' .�.q��..., ^ � �, '. 4�y z ��w 'N � � " w ... � . ., � ., . . ' , . . µ 'W a �%3�. �� ' �� , ��. F T �' ..- € � .,_ ..�..; _, � �t�r'�I�� " . �.�� , .. ' �; �,� � " , , N , .�, � . V��;� � , . , . . . . ... �rx--, �_ ; =v gF �__ ,_.y .�� .de�s "i �.. . . .M - �:r� '`t� ',�� .f�� - . g >�. :� ' ' �1.,3f�1�� . ' � a6•�t,?a ...��. � • ,. , . . „ . _ . . .,. ' - �" . .. ` . 9t'Tib��t ' . '� . =�: - � �#tyi'� ��lly�►�.' , . �:�— __ , ' ' '� � � I�ir��#� . k , ; ,� : . . . . . � - - . °�� . . �� . . � :R� . . - R•°f F�ur�l,Aar�� _ , � � . � �- .. , o . > .,$� � � . . -� .g� � " � .. "— • . . � . .��s'�, _ . � , . ., � . �. . _. _ ` .. '�'!:i?�'�'<:! ;"� _ »,s�, _, r r . . . ,�,.,.� . . ,,. ' ' .. - � � �^V � .,.�. ��[t �f' . � �� ,... - _ ,, �+ . . �. _ q„iy_a c f 5 . �4" f`w� ,��R ��i p��y�yr µ�� „ - - � , f . . . . � .�� $...,pg.e - - � . , .. . . #;� q ' ^�, " " , ■1� , � . , - . , ,, . - a• �� ». .!':i t � .... ' .1�. � o. �� . ' .• . '�. .a _ � 6 � � �� ' . V : . � , �t� ` �'+� ,. •_ � t ' a r b , . �� _ ti 5 . s* �� i j� � i < .r., � �� ,: J �Yiii!'Gk��A�R '�F�+ �'��.G�1�S31'i , ' ;. , , . � � ,�.11'1'�1�� .. , ., ^ . �„j - -.««-., p 'r' �- ��— - ,' _ '�;r^ ;g ` �� , « Cl� R''� s ;st " � , b� IkS C'iunC� t .. ' . , ..8£� q ,# � . - �- .. ' � ' , 4�• .. . .lA. . ' v�. , . ' ., � � �iefl B��l'Tr� � �� „ . 'v4�W ,` ' „ , �� ` .. .. � `3E�.�3t7�tmx'4i ��3C',�� kt�.'� ` `",.,' " z,,, _ � � , _ . � �N, •, -. �� .�". :�Ifpf.Y,tR1.\{4:.�1 Std�VPj W! , , , ^, i�t.� _ , ' , . . ° , ' � ' � , . . Y. .... � . - $ � T�� r�� r��r�� 'r��r��r�� t F��r� �'�� ,� �� c� �� °� E-a>;x:e�n.K SY:rocire;x.:e:t,@�:r,af�;yse3y,.r�a�C S_ctc��i-Y!c_:r�c�e - ;. :�;«� s��R��,:�-:�r.�:rr � L,lt`b�tl �f��'4''��'1 �t��3F1Clf'�P ., ..., �,<�.,�..;:;,"Ms: , , , ... `� ;1-�� ...�.:�'•-� � : ��}�} � � East Renton PAA Legend i i ii RENHILL � � Preserve Our Plateau PAA i� � ii j i�___� East Renton PAA �i ii ' � Poll Results = ii � � Insufficient Data i ii � I � 20-29% �i ----_____ � � �� I ------i � so-ss°io BRIAR ; �� . ��\�� TANNER � 40-49% i j � '� u� �:A i BRIGID � �� —� � � J�E� E �� -- _=� - � \y\yy�� y�� ; 1 �� \\\� � _ � �� ;� . � �`-��, ..�.��--�-:-� _ �. � ,, B i,�� :, �;� .��_ �` �— ��—�� HUSKY , , ' I �„ EASTWOOD i .� � � �i �' _ � TANYA � � �� ; ODONNELL �� IDA ; u ��-�" � , AILA Q==��_�� '\��-.' i i �R------ �\��\�� ; l� ;�� DANIEL � ;� ��`��\\�� _____-'_,'\. ; �_� VALENCIA � \ � � �� - -_ _, � ` - � � i / �"� '� '� ,_ � -_� _ � �-- � / //U _,_``_ '� '� CEDAR PARK ; ,. � .--------_ --...__.�.___�_1 , -- u=_;, East Renton PAAj ;_______ ____-- _ _ ___ _ ___----. egen ° �� RENHILL � Preserve Our Plateau PAA ii ii °---ii East Renton PAA ii �� ' ��___� II il , , Poll Results --�-� ii � � �� -----� ii ; Insufficient Data ° ii �� 20-29% G�� ('.{;.� � i _ __ � __ _ t ..� �i i —� 30-39% I // BRIAR .�� \. ,\� if ., / ` --' � � � �� TANNER �=j��- � 40-49% f� I Z �. \;; r I ; BRIGID #�� u_ -- � - �_�� - � �� :� '� -- �_� � ,� �. � J/��QI�E�fl�E � , , \ \ \ , _ _ _ - � � � ��`�� `� ��`� �I �`�-_�_�_ - � � �� A ` �� . � � -�� 4 , �� . F��---- � - � � �. �l� ��! � � �� _ � - �� BR \ , � -, � ,�. � =ii � \��`� � � � HUSKY ; , ��____�___= EASTWOOD i� ' � � � iL=__ �� %�' �� \� ��/ �� - . �� , � , .,��., �, , � � ODONNELL �� ---__ � � ,� TANYA �� __ -�� IDA ' AILA � ,� � � � ��_-----_�_=_ ; _ � ----- , � ; � � , „ , u , � � �A ,�\ � � ��,. ��, � i �� -- _ �_� � :�` f�' � „ DANIEL , � � -� �� , ` ��\\��' � � �� ' ��----��,=-,�\ ,�� VALENCIA � ' , � ---- � � �- �� - � , � . . � , � , ,. ,� ; - ; , , , '� �` ' �� -� � � � � " ,r - _ . , / I �� //i it `�-„ i� `�-'J CEDAR PARK � i L U��Y �� := �.= ♦ � ♦ ��N�p� PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING ON THE EAST RENTON PLATEAU POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA 2003 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS 6:00 PM,October 1,2003 Renton City Council Chambers 7�'Floor,Renton City Hall 1055 South Grady Way The Renton Planning Commission will hold a briefing on the st�ff recommendation for changing the City's current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designations for its 2,700-acre East Renton Plateau Potential Annexation Area. A public hearing on this item will be held on October 15,2003 in the same chambers. Renton's Comprehensive Plan currently designates approximately 72% of this area as Residential Single Family (RS), with potential R-8 zoning upon annexation, with the remaining plus or minus 28% of the area as Residential Rural(RR), with potential R-1 to R-5 zoning,upon annexation. Potential Annexation Areas are areas that are designated"urban"on the County's Comprehensive Plan but located in unincorporated King County. By mutual agreement these areas have been assigned to adjacent cities which, it is hoped will eventually annex them. Because most annexations are initiated by residents outside a city petitioning to be brought into it, and because the process is inherently slow, it is unlikely that this whole area will be brought into the City at any time in the near future. Even though these areas may not be annexed into the City in the foreseeable future, the City can influence what happens in them through its sewer extension policies, which are based on current land use designations, and possibly interlocal agreements with the County for joint project review and the use of similar development standards. Staff reviewed in detail three new land use scenarios in addition to the City's existing Land Use Map designations for the 2,700-acre study area. These ranged from revisions to the current mix of land use designations using existing zones to a revised mix of designations with a new R-4 zoning designation. All three new land use scenarios would result in a fewer number of new units on the estimated 367 remaining acres of developable land in the study area. In addition, all three scenarios would result in fewer vehicular trips during the day. The table below is a comparative summary of the existing(Scenario A) and new land use scenarios staff looked at. Table 1.—Comparative Summary of Land Use Scenarios Land Use Potential Potential Density Density w/ Bonusable Alternative New New w/o bonuses Acres Units AWDTE bonuses Scenario A 2,060 19,714 N/A N/A N/A Scenario B 1,841 17,618 5 du/net ac 6 du/net ac ±125 acres Scenario C 1,509 14,441 4 du/net ac 6 du/net ac ±125 acres Scenario D 1,987 19,016 4 du/net ac 6 du/net ac 367 acres Staff are recommending that the Planning Commission endorse Scenario C, which would result in an estimated 1,509 new residential units at buildout. This land use scenario would change the (over) � � . East Renton Plateau PAA Comprehensive Plan Amendment, 2003-M-4 2 October 1, 2003 current land use designation mix so that approximately 80% of the 2,700-acre study area would have the Residential Rural(R-4 zone) land use designation and only±20%of it would continue to have the Residential Single Family(R-8 zone) land use designation. Under this land use scenario there would be an estimated 5,273 fewer average weekday trip ends (AWDTE)than would be generated under the City's current land use designations on the estimated 367 acres of remaining developable land. In terms of their fiscal impacts on the City, Scenario C reflected a mare positive cash flow to the City from new development than the other scenarios. This,presumably, is because this lower density(predominantly 4 du/net acre) alternative would result in larger 9,000 plus square foot lots with new housing on them assessed at more than$500,000 per unit. Such housing is consistent with the City's existing residential housing policies, which encourage both a mix and range of housing types and prices in the community. Staff are also recommending that the Commission endorse the development of mandatory community arterial street edge landscaping and buffering standards that would apply eventually along all community arterials* and at least initially, along NE 4"'/SE 128"'Street. These would include planting strips with plant materials such as evergreen trees and hedges,durable decorative fencing, and irrigation systems, sufficient to screen abutting residential development. Staff is also recommending that the Commission endorse the development of optional bonus improvements in specified areas. A density bonus of up to two units per net acre(maximum 6 du/net acre) would be provided for improvements, which would result in higher quality of design and site planning. Such bonus improvements could include: improved landscaping,building design and mix of housing styles;the use of durable building materials such as wood,brick and masonry; and improved unit articulation through the use of modulation, and decorative fenestration and roof forms. Scenario A—Existing Land Use Designations Scenario C—Low Density Urban Designation y ..... -----. �� v� - � ZONES ACRES E7CI5T.UNITSTNEW UN�TS ;R5,Uac 83 ��p R-�,vac i tsc as' ,r, a-�aeae.. +,�o sn acs i T" ';R5�R�fe+ 68 58 319 ' _ i:-s.vac � za iaa "f,._:. i i�.� � � � R-'o.ReOev.'-3G 2d—J— 159 "+ .Y:+Y^�,K,' . � ';F_.,�._, R-8,`iac ' 2A 74fi ir.%,.. '' .ti':G, i��/. �� C�B j; i�.i..•••P..•. iR-8.Retler.� 27 26 17U ;~,..:t' ..:v�'k'..-.'��i'�":: - ; _.t'± � , ..�_...�_�� '1.� ~•�.:��a .ri . � .:.�...«_-..� . . . � T� � �� ....b .. _'_'_ _ _ . . .. . ... . - .��`SF�. Ii., .. ,mTl�$ I.- . 367 ia2 v «.:ar+a;.. ; �. �. - ; ."�: - , _ . � , �_.. � ..-. � J nF,':;.C,:S�F ~f� TOTAIS 3u7 ".5' : 7 C9 a — ' /' .� . , �=-.: , �:a .�--. : .. , -., �—.___ . . .,:, �. ., a •" i! i �r, ...._ _.,., ,. ,., •• ' �'\� � -- ._... . ._ - ;_:;;, a. ,. . . _,:; i _ �:T._� , .. -.. � ,:_.:.a � e �.."" ,.._ ` ' c.. �` � „ ' _ , - �; � _ . — ' �-- . �..�`.,,.:-r.,:_.�_- - g 3 ,'- ;.,..., ;1: '�.t. t".:a`.:_.: . � j:.� �:,a`-___�i - ..� .y � �.. � ,�-� . � � t.4:r ' � ( '�'` ., - �� t i;�� ,' � >� � ., `��•._,� � f,� _ ��:�: F�� -, <�� ,...b..�.__.,....__e:..,.., �i� 'z�� "� _ - _..._...._... �.sl:1,�!::�` i� , r ...,,._� �_. , -�;..{; _.:, -� ��... �•, { � � -1� �d;,',._ f 4��r--` � -, _ , �'.,,-. .�,, . � . ' a „ '�� ' _ -_ ' � " _ - a " . r . I ! , ,. .. , ��.j-j p a , '��>>�-8 f ,__ . �p.f�-c;z - ,. k...:_• . ` i .:. . _... - _ ._ _ _ _ .:__ . , � .. .: -- - �.,, : , ;�; ...4 . : � y`—y„ �i� � . � '�_a: L_� � . � i �"ti.Y „ .� —� ' j . .Z.,�✓ V./ .. � i # ! � t''J: _ � � � � � _ �._ . ,.. . � .. '"_:. ' .-_._... , _ —. r � i � w._,�. < . ,- :-.-:: �__�_ .,.._. _ . , , „ �, . . __< ,: -�� _ . , . � , ._ _ , _ _ . . .,- , . . . . � , ,: , . , - -- - � ,_...,�.� _�-.�:�:�- � -' - -- -- _ - _ , .._-- .� �z . �� a:�__� _ _.r ...-,- -- = - - -- __ _. _ ''r� _ �'��-:�' �;. - 1._�"_� � �`��; ''`� - - _:_-._.._ d.,, -__ _-,._._.-:..__ .,, . ; i.:._. : - .i""_^---- ._� .0 � � . . . . � 'i ( { 7�.. . : � � ;t-�+; ,�i �.t,l. ;. : � �..� � Y ; •� �.�. ' ..._�q�'. , ! � ' .�'� _ . 41 _ `� ,.) � .�,.. ��-.t�_..�,� ' . - __ II^, �4�"�y,� � z- ... ��". ', � �� : �� 'L; ..� �. ' . .,�. � �. .� �.I ti.., �� p � � .. � ,�-�: ��.�... ��, � �,.__�.�W ,� ,, : ��, -�:� =��,� - �.^ :' ;:-_ '`'�_.:'-k:�:.�[ � ,p�� ... � 4 4 :�:: ._.� �[�;i y' ,,. _ ,i � : - `;;�y " � r--; „r , 'f i� '=:_ , �f ��',i :"� F: ; � �-.�.�-;,. � �_;;, „ ;� ..�_ �`;`" :. ;;`�.:r_' ��h�k A'�e��,�� `� �� '�'F � �� ... ' i ,� ( �" t� d g � � �<. .'. . ��? . ;.. -i �`�'.°�''��''�% i �i� "-`;�;',..,�,- . ' R�z_��. '' � f� � ....._. '_' t.:i...p a1`�" " . '�'f ,L,.��'u}` .I'_..._... A � � 1 I � '.�' ""�?,�:8.. _ `�=';':`- �""4�..._:,.1��.i�.,.: ��... .K,. �� x3v...7-_r" �� tid . ,._�e {$;�. ' >.�'�'i, V. �L,a,,:f,�,�� ,, . � z ; ,_��.:.a <..:::._; _ _r.t� �.� ,,, ��.-,,,r�. _ _ _ '•.pf-�: �.�;,: ^ .�."'_. � � _. .._, � ..f..: ...a _,� ui _ `�Y-,l <<: ` _... .: --Y,-�..�L%-:�..% .- _ ,.�":..{ . �....,� __� �__--.....______..�--.._:._._.. .__ � _._ ..._..._.___.____�..�__....�_?e.__" -. . .... �_. _.. East Renton Plateau Study Area a t East Renton Plateau Study Area "' """"""'"'"'�"" nKa aWu �.:, �....��..,�,.w..e t Scenano A-Current R-5 8 R-8 Land l�se D 'natwns Scenario C-Lon�Density Urban(R-4'fl-6'R-81 ` """""'"""'"` � es�9 '"'�"S.�.w1�"_�" � - .�. .,...... -.: .� . �'. _. ..r,_�..,....,.....4�....�,.,._. t:�auon ye ::.:v � ,�., 0 2nn� annn - w _..-�r�--.� - n:w,'....�, I '*�,xs-�.,_ _„ I „ .,.. _.mrc.. ..._... . *includes"PrincipaP',"Minor",and"Collec[or"arterials �Y O Uti � :� ,� ♦ � ♦ ��N�� PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING ON THE EAST RENTON PLATEAU POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA 2003 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS � 6:00 PM,October 1,2003 Renton City Council Chambers 7�'Floor,Renton City Hall 1055 South Grady Way The Renton Planning Commission will hold a briefing on the staff recommendation for changing the City's current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designations for its 2,700-acre East Renton Plateau Potential Annexation Area. A public hearing on this item will be held on October 15, 2003 in the same chambers. Renton's Comprehensive Plan currently designates approximately 72% of this area as Residential Single Family(RS), with potential R-8 zoning upon annexation, with the remaining plus or minus 28% of the area as Residential Rural(RR), with potential R-1 to R-5 zoning, upon annexation. Potential Annexation Areas are areas that are designated"urban"on the County's Comprehensive Plan but located in unincorporated King County. By mutual agreement these areas have been assigned to adjacent cities which, it is hoped will eventually annex them. Because most annexations are initiated by residents outside a city petitioning to be brought into it,and because the process is inherently slow, it is unlikely that this whole area will be brought into the City at any time in the near future. Even though these areas may not be annexed into the City in the foreseeable future, the City can influence what happens in them through its sewer extension policies, which are based on current land use designations,and possibly interlocal agreements with the County for joint project review and the use of similar development standards. Staff reviewed in detail three new land use scenarios in addition to the City's existing Land Use Map designations for the 2,700-acre study area. These ranged from revisions to the current mix of land use designations using existing zones to a revised mix of designations with a new R-4 zoning designation. All three new land use scenarios would result in a fewer number of new units on the estimated 367 remaining acres of developable land in the study area. In addition, all three scenarios would result in fewer vehicular trips during the day. The table below is a comparative summary of the existing(Scenario A) and new land use scenarios staff looked at. Table 1.—Comparative Summary of Land Use Scenarios Land Use Potential Potential Density Density w/ Bonusable Alternative New New w/o bonuses Acres Units AWDTE bonuses Scenario A 2,060 19,714 N/A N/A N/A Scenario B 1,841 17,618 5 du/net ac 6 du/net ac ±125 acres Scenario C 1,509 14,441 4 du/net ac 6 du/net ac ±125 acres Scenario D 1,987 19,016 4 du/net ac 6 du/net ac 367 acres Staff are recommending that the Planning Commission endorse Scenario C, which would result in an estimated 1,509 new residential units at buildout. This land use scenario would change the (over) East Renton Plateau PAA Comprehensive Plan Amendment, 2003-M-4 2 � October 1, 2003 current land use designation mix so that approximately 80°Io of the 2,700-acre study area would have the Residential Rural (R-4 zone) land use designation and only±20% of it would continue to have the Residential Single Family (R-8 zone)land use designation. Under this land use scenario there would be an estimated 5,273 fewer average weekday trip ends (AWDTE)than would be generated under the City's current land use designations on the estimated 367 acres of remaining developable land. In terms of their fiscal impacts on the City, Scenario C reflected a more positive cash flow to the City from new development than the other scenarios. This,presumably, is because this lower density(predominantly 4 du/net acre)alternative would result in larger 9,000 plus square foot lots with new housing on them assessed at more than$500,000 per unit. Such housing is consistent with the City's existing residential housing policies, which encourage both a mix and range of housing types and prices in the community. Staff are also recommending that the Commission endorse the development of mandatory community arterial street edge landscaping and buffering standards that would apply eventually along all community arterials* and at least initially, along NE 4`�/SE 128�'Street. These would include planting strips with plant materials such as evergreen trees and hedges,durable decorative fencing, and irrigation systems, sufficient to screen abutting residential development. Staff is also recommending that the Commission endorse the development of optional bonus improvements in specified areas. A density bonus of up to tw�units per net acre(maximum 6 du/net acre) would be provided for improvements, which would result in higher quality of design and site planning. Such bonus improvements could include: improved landscaping,building design and mix of housing styles;the use of durable building materials such as wood,brick and masonry; and improved unit articulation through the use of modulation, and decorative fenestration and roof forms. Scenario A-Existing Land Use Designations Scenario C-Low Density Urban Designation _.._. . -------- , --,. . .... .. 5 i� � �r (,� ZONES ACRES FXFST.UNRS NEW UNPfS r �$.� � � R-i,Vac WC 49i � . , 4� ��•._ 'f�J.f�8�l. � J� �9 i ^.. R 6.R�ea.� 2d � 1i8 � . ':` ' R�6,Redev' 30 2d 759 �,��: •.� .-.. 'P.$.� '�1 i f� --'rN' , .�.�:,�,.. `\•.�\ R-d.Vac i 2,1 746 _ .,..._<,`�"��L�' .��. 1Q7 9=l (�8 '�"*3��;r.4�:M.;e_� �k-s.Ftane.�.• n z� i�a +^t...,d:.�Y :,.�°x^��r,p,,2 �ri - ,- . ... .,s-- ._„8� �. .,..y,�.. .s., � " ..� `'_.. .. .:;. . , . � „ !�l .s. 70TALS 307 t52 1 vC4 -Ra�',�.;y�.,;x� .. _.._._.__ .._ .. .. . . ........ �'.i_��'k.'�.V;ifi ; ' ;'-"¢_,.". . '' - ,:„� - v .. ,. : _ .:,� c, ',: � i ::.,�i. 5 2v:• i . _ J . _ - .. .� � , ,. ,� �� - ,. :..�. � .,..,. _. e. � ^�.�i - -- I t- : _ :. �*'�- � �. -;:.:.. . ., _:"i,fY -` ' . ��r� �— u � :' :- : ::� - . : .. .. _� . � • ` . z:_,\ l . ; , �1 ;:' ..a �, �" ,, r� , -, ,..,,._{ - ._ =�, _ , ' 't..�.:': `,. �``� ` f _i i ' �: �-� '��<• �'-� - --- .+� :�,-- �-..�i z�:;r;'_-;.,.�_..:1_.�_.;�,- ,- �' a�:.r. '" ..� � � ;- ��:'_�•.. , : ,, ... , , n .. �.�..�-�� ,,;,�t �y ;. : _ _ .�..._ ... =��f�i;-:4 ��,_-_ ;+. •, ..�j, ,- ' w.._a.,.,..,_, �� i` ;, . ;� �`:�� _ - _ ��r_ _ L.`'",,.:_ ,., , .,_,, :_.,� 7" ., .�.. w_ ; �.. � ��„---:� , , � , _ - � ;�I L y , _ •,i •�_ , . ;, p - p p� , .ir � ; �. -� �- . .' , { ., . _�i._ -- .,F`t'O "I :. �. Y' ..- :�:;. � ..' ', " ; - - � ey _,. �. -._,. ; , �'-z.._., ., _... , -,. . .� ' .. _ .:,y"� r� � _ . ,.. i<.:i�' �.:.,_ �: . Y,�, :�. 4_ � _ i •,.,�"`y.�, ' J J ;!y/i � t ' ' �--.. � "y../ Y � - ..�.. :.:_� .)„ '� !i �.i.� , . � al '; . r �..�,v�`.,,€-,"'=. � n � � _' --.z n� �,�^` i ''�'i •R-. � ._.... , .K" 'i I �.�"" ' .�� ..5u' i y ' " R . ' " .s � a�i � ��. � . . _ � ' ' �_,:�tl:_-;a� - -_ = — -b- - - ..��.�. �_��z .�s_< �i . , _ �:� ��- ,... �^ -�-- ---_ ,. . . __ - -,:.. .___ ,._,x ..�. � _ _:. _� :!'�a ��.=�- ,�,'- _ ,- . . �„ ,....,—._.__...-_ , - �, - - - ; _... .��; : ,�s.��I. 1� �.; -- ._._:_.. _ _ _..t,_:___._..-_ �� .b � ��. � -a.. ..._. ,. � : _._ .; . ��, ,. -$.`� _ ;, . .. ; - ; � :.: v � _ , F-�=;r;.�. � �� . �- ��'� �;, �. : . ..:`�:;��. ,_::�., , , _ ,:. ' . .,,:..- .. . � �- - .. � ��,;,, � �, � p �.,.: � t:�':s � ' :i�;.. --� �..-' ��,� -�. � ( ._.; : ; :.:. ; �"� i, � �_... '_`_;:.�;� °,i ?'` :_ _� . �'. _.. � I -t'. tE'� . _.. ' ...n �-�::....i-_'-se: _ ,y�'4,1 .��i_�.� _i� � ;a= ' ., ,--... �r ';r-� �.�-,:, ',k _�,',� % +�, ,. � , _`��:° y..:�,-: � r.�a�:_-,.P li I:s_; . :!_._ ��(�_-;,.<.+-x .3 i i 1� {g + y�::-�:`u.�'E A Yl'�� .I �?::;_ ''' �.N_�:��R ,� �,I_i� 1 �p�;,�::,.., �r.i.� . � -� � . ,,��°;J`° �,,i..:r �,.�.I.��;,.,.._ -,; � i ,.<:,•.[�,' # � , .-_..,.�L�L:'' . ��.iR..•� ::i ;:T.,.iB;,. "'� A.:�i'�"� �.yi.*!� � � 7 ��t `,� "'7'_.. ..._'.��.._,. � �rt2 �;z�' �.• ;-„::�:�- ,,��-�r' .;<'_:, � ,�, ��'N�_^�_ --A'�.. - �C'`. � �A�y . .a __ ;�'� `.i".`�' � �i �`�` i ` ; ..: - .,�. <<,,;,".'; - - -�� — . '-.,.' , .. ` , �``��.., . ,s., r�, �....:=..��, ,: ' €�- ��.r . ,...., _. L`=--': . , . _-�y ,.f .�;../—'�--.t' " ��. . �. �-`-..1..---�„ ...�Y-.,✓°.:�; _.._.� � =--_—._..r_..�_._._u_.._.__�.LLs=... __ ... � __.. . ....._---._:,_—._..._._.._.... East Renton Plateau Stud Area ( ��*H1'� y � East Renton lateau tu y rea ":: .�.�,.,�._..a t Scenarro A-Current R-5 8 R-8 Land Use Des natwns `{K�� a� ( Scenario C-low Density Urban(R-4'R-6'R-8j `' "�°""""""�` g ^.�'5�.: F . «,...,.,.«�... l� 2Mo �.. ..'"^.*..: ... � . . �..r,��..,....�..<,...M................ i'�4Ul;u � .,.. _ _. _ �'� -.."...-.�. :. . 00. ._.... _ � �....-,�..»� a. .v ;9e,.•:::��-- �- � 'o�,��:�r �.:y�a:: ' �..�...�..,.�' I '4a,:%��.... ._... ._._. *includes"Principal","Minor",and"Collector"arterials . � � �Y O �1 ,� P: � ♦ � ♦ ��N�p� PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING ON THE EAST RENTON PLATEAU POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA 2003 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS 6:00 PM,October 1,2003 Renton City Council Chambers 7�'Floor,Renton City Hall 1055 South Grady Way The Renton Planning Cominission will hold a briefing on the staff recommendation for changing the City's cunent Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designations for its 2,700-acre East Renton Plateau Potential Annexation Area. A public hearing on this item will be held on October 15, 2003 in the same chambers. Renton's Comprehensive Plan currently designates approximately 72% of this area as Residential Single Family(RS), with potential R-8 zoning upon annexation, with the remaining plus or minus 28% of the area as Residential Rural(RR), with potential R-1 to R-5 zoning, upon annexation. Potential Annexation Areas are areas that are designated"urban"on the County's Comprehensive Plan but located in unincorporated King County. By mutual agreement these areas have been assigned to adjacent cities which, it is hoped will eventually annex them. Because most annexations are initiated by residents outside a city petitioning to be brought into it, and because the process is inherently slow, it is unlikely that this whole area will be brought into the City at any time in the near future. Even though these areas may not be annexed into the City in the foreseeable future,the City can influence what happens in them through its sewer extension policies, which are based on current land use designations,and possibly interlocal agreements with the County for joint project review and the use of similar development standards. Staff reviewed in detail three new land use scenarios in addition to the City's existing Land Use Map designations for the 2,700-acre study area. These ranged from revisions to the cunent mix of land use designations using existing zones to a revised mix of designations with a new R-4 zoning designation. All three new land use scenarios would result in a fewer number of new units on the estimated 367 remaining acres of developable land in the study area. In addition, all three scenarios would result in fewer vehicular trips during the day. The table below is a comparative summary of the existing(Scenario A) and new land use scenarios staff looked at. Table 1.—Comparative Summary of Land Use Scenarios Land Use Potential Potential Density Density w/ Bonusable Alternative New New w/o bonuses Acres Units AWDTE bonuses Scenario A 2,060 19,714 N/A N/A N/A Scenario B 1,841 17,618 5 du/net ac 6 du/net ac ±125 acres Scenario C 1,509 14,441 4 du/net ac 6 du/net ac +125 acres Scenario D 1,987 19,016 4 du/net ac 6 du/net ac 367 acres Staff are recommending that the Planning Commission endorse Scenario C, which would result in an estimated 1,509 new residential units at buildout. This land use scenario would change the (over) � i • East Renton Plateau PAA Comprehensive Plan Amendment, 2003-M-4 2 October 1,2003 current land use designation mix so that approximately 80°Io of the 2,700-acre study area would have the Residential Rural(R-4 zone) land use designation and only±20%of it would continue to have the Residential Single Family(R-8 zone) land use designation. Under this land use scenario there would be an estimated 5,273 fewer average weekday trip ends (AWDTE) than would be generated under the City's current land use designations on the estimated 367 acres of remaining developableland. In terms of their fiscal impacts on the City,Scenario C reflected a more positive cash flow to the City from new development than the other scenazios. This,presumably, is because this lower density(predominantly 4 du/net acre)alternative would result in larger 9,000 plus square foot lots with new housing on them assessed at more than $500,000 per unit. Such housing is consistent with the City's existing residential housing policies, which encourage both a mix and range of housing types and prices in the community. Staff are also recommending that the Commission endorse the development of mandatory community arterial street edge landscaping and buffering standards that would apply eventually along all community arterials* and at least initially, along NE 4�'/SE 128"'Street. These would include planting strips with plant materials such as evergreen trees and hedges, durable decorative fencing,and inigation systems, sufficient to screen abutting residential development. Staff is also recommending that the Commission endorse the development of optional bonus improvements in specified areas. A density bonus of up to two units per net acre (maximum 6 du/net acre) would be provided for improvements, which would result in higher quality of design and site planning. Such bonus improvements could include: improved landscaping,building design and mix of housing styles; the use of durable building materials such as wood,brick and masonry; and improved unit articulation through the use of modulation, and decorative fenestration and roof forms. Scenario A—Existing Land Use Designations Scenario C—Low Density Urban Designation ..___......,_--- S ��,� � � n� � ZONES ACRES E%IST.UNRS NEW UNITS �—"-- R-n.V'ac i t4C 43+ P''�� R-4 ReJev., 110 9,9 4G3 4._ -�� -:.. " . : .., ..:. ` �F�513�. E� 53 319 � .�r � �¢.s_vac I za iaE '�T�..... ,.. < R-'o.Redev: 30 2d J 159 "c+-:.e+ Mg''�=�^ i �R8. .U�C �3 a�L ti,�.:._.>.. � � 4%^....,','.3.�.'�`:r. -.-,.,�..,v R.R.'� 2A 748 _�.��._;.,, �;;.. _ �R23.�. 167 9� EF8 '�,,j:at.g;,"-�:'!r'; R-B.Fte;lev 2t zd i>u �.:°. � ' ; ' .. ~-�'.0 :;�� r t `;'.. :;,, - y,` _. �rera,�s : acT 's2 ir:s �:..:�._� ;s"- r ' 2� _ � _._, ", -ws. '�„� Iy � ,,. ^.. .� . �.:E'< . - A1S 3F7 1`�i �� . ...----. �, ..._�:; _ ..__. __ _ - � i v �. � _� _:.....:, .* ,,.. i , .� �., � ._-._...._ , � x. i�-",`�`. �•_.. - � _'` � :. . r ;. :� .. . ., :. ., s - - \. � ,` � ��:s. ;. . ,,.. \,i � � ,�. � . •.`�- ` . � ' � ^�� _—_ =�� :. ��:. - -' _ � � � .. .. � t � � t:. .�.i i� . 5�.-. I :i _ � ':. `._ ' '^ I_, ,��.� �"l _ �!i {' �+',S_ � �.�`�.r�:.._- ` �i � w '_ -. V .� ...�z.-..._..-.._ �f :Zt ..-J. _ * ��,r� ._.. � � _.` _ � :�-_ �- .,, t , � l�Y ;:.,. ., _ ------, , � ��,., � � + . � :.ri-.;. •=..._,.,.,.,:.,_ F ai ,::�...:%•� , ; ,v: ' ,. �; .,,� .,. �� - R�, .:..._ r �y �,: �-..�� ....,......._...,_.,...,,. ,I�[i . 1 • �'7 .';,. __.,.__�,.._. .,,..s(,�1.�'��-e;tr-:_ �� A; 4;�,_�, a..... �,....-�� yZc� - �`':.�' e� ��:,? - . , 'Z— ..... ( � )�,i , . � „ ``-�:. / . w�..,:;: �ww � : :• �" •i -.� ?'i'F[�`r_.. �� ."---:- - €.r. � ;� , _.. , .. _.. _ y , ,. , .F:--;,. _ � _ . �i., -4 j�=$ i:._..._ , �, , _._,. ; __��,. , _ `',. ,,�.. _.,� ._ : ,.- .nA�'��` ,;. s � .d . .. . � -- -� - . a_._�...:._��q.. Y Y - - � �"�i, ,�,; .. - -� � _w t ' .,e . ." __ - . ' ' - � . , � . , �, . .., , .. i� ' . - J - ., ... ,_.k'�,i2 ,._,�.f�!:s'Le.__: .__. ir._: q �,'I ,It��.� � � -- --- - _.�'._:"T�.__ _ .$�^^w- .ci� L.. ;"__..,--:.... ..,r.._,r` ..._r_. �?'- �;,:..,,�.._:. . � ��^� c ,� ... w�z ' J` ''^.-_._.��__J.. . ._ '..L_. _ _ f�'1 p - -'...._.__-...__� -_ __ .: a � 3—i_i �".'`�' i _ ' . , - -._._.- ' "' � - -.:d� _ .... �,.i....: i'�n >., r•a ; . ' -..:� it:.� . .._.:-. h .. � k, ._:.'�'.,��*,�,. .. . y, � �� -- --, �,....... :`" , i..:�, L:.-, i.�, :�:..�'� � I---;, . ' p �. 1._ E . `r�:g �_ k� u . .� �: � 9."� i -�. L_. ��.-� V��-u'.. �' ,--�.;�, u. �i -�,_ �. . " i , "`.��_-r-_� a y�. k. . �'1..,�: •F t '�.+_ '_� �.. i _ � .-,.. - -� .�� r .. ' '.;.. ';^=.. _,.,..�. ' M• � . , _:' .. , .YG 1 � � , ,a•.. � l � _ ' .r i . . .J�.,; ..�.§. B . �� , yt,y�-% j 't �--,�•2;.. � !'r_ ;i : 'r'�{'�... . __x_��.i,.�; .!'; - {.:�'� ` "' p '+: _...,.;� .. �.7 - �..� ^n^,;�.e` ..��-„��E. ,.� ., � ,��. ,;, , ��`�,-��_$� � _ .; ► i K ... , :. y _ ,: �.v �;.� ;. ...� : ,��^� �� j ,� _, p , _ ;. ( . "� .��.��,�3�:�.F�-4 ��al��•i'!��.:[� .::'..�F;�:"� (.::..n�,M.,_:1.� ..!f 5 ff _....__.w...�..,f':t_ _.. . �� k . '� � i ii 0�_ r� _�a� v_. "� � \� "'"a�$y`-� �r...._::..Y:_�•_�s7._ • _ �Y_ ..� Li,. � � ' k:.. : '�'�. ;;�::_n.�„, . 'F'_: �� i�� '�-•._ '�y� '��r '` ��,+� �nrf .- - I .,. i ' y"'4� li,+,, �: ;� t' I ' �r��.,� .,,,:.. �� - - , � . .�, _ �eP,,,:..::.�,��,..:>. �:.._.... , . ,� �= : . , :.�:� . ,:.., �—�, , ` i ScenarioA-CurrentR-5&R-BLard l�nl�iI-~-•i .-3.=:.sj•,,.; '�-=---------._..�..�.____._._ �-:_,-:.''_:._ . ___ -- ' �-"----"-- " " East Renton Plateau Study Area "; ,��.'�,M.�, � East Renton Plateau Study Area o t � ..�..,...,.....� �K� Scenariu C-Low Dens�ry Urban,R-4'R-6'R-81 __ ...,......_,,„,�,.,.,..w Use Designatwns � � �� ,,, __ ..__..., i ��T�.,..,.,......,..w.w,..�.,.-._. � _ �'•� ..............,_. c .u..._._.. � i. �y�.___.___ _. _ , _aoi o ,..... y._.... ` , ..,...,.__ I � w.,-.,...,�, �e _..._ � v�.,.,.. , 6.��....,.�.r �a� �.._ _. *includes"Principal","Minor",and"Collecror"arterials 1`�Y O ♦ �' '- ♦ � ��N�p� PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING ON THE EAST RENTON PLATEAU POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA 2003 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS 6:00 PM,October 1,2003 Renton City Council Chambers 7�'Floor,Renton City Hall 1055 South Grady Way The Renton Planning Commission will hold a briefing on the sta�f recommendation for changing the City's current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designations for its 2,700-acre East Renton Plateau Potential Annexation Area. A public hearing on this item will be held on October 15, 2003 in the same chambers. Renton's Comprehensive Plan currently designates approximately 72% of this area as Residential Single Family(RS), with potential R-8 zoning upon annexation, with the remaining plus or minus 28% of the area as Residential Rural(RR), with potential R-1 to R-5 zoning, upon annexation. Potential Annexation Areas are areas that are designated"urban"on the County's Comprehensive Plan but located in unincorporated King County. By mutual agreement these areas have been assigned to adjacent cities which, it is hoped will eventually annex them. Because most annexations are initiated by residents outside a city petitioning to be brought into it, and because the process is inherently slow, it is unlikely that this whole area will be brought into the City at any time in the near future. Even though these areas may not be annexed into the City in the foreseeable future, the City can influence what happens in them through its sewer extension policies, which are based on current land use designations,and possibly interlocal agreements with the County for joint project review and the use of similar development standards. Staff reviewed in detail three new land use scenarios in addition to the City's existing Land Use Map designations for the 2,700-acre study area. These ranged from revisions to the current mix of land use designations using existing zones to a revised mix of designations with a new R-4 zoning designation. All three new land use scenarios would result in a fewer number of new units on the estimated 367 remaining acres of developable land in the study area. In addition, all three scenarios would result in fewer vehicular trips during the day. The table below is a comparative summary of the existing(Scenario A)and new land use scenarios staff looked at. Table 1.—Comparative Summary of Land Use Scenarios Land Use Potential Potential Density Density w/ Bonusable Alternative New New w/o bonuses Acres Units AWDTE bonuses Scenario A 2,060 19,714 N/A N/A N/A Scenario B 1,841 17,618 5 du/net ac 6 du/net ac ±125 acres Scenario C 1,509 14,441 4 du/net ac 6 du/net ac ±125 acres Scenario D 1,987 19,016 4 du/net ac 6 du/net ac 367 acres Staff are recommending that the Planning Commission endorse Scenario C, which would result in an estimated 1,509 new residential units at buildout. This land use scenario would change the (over) East Renton Plateau PAA Comprehensive Plan Amendment, 2003-M-4 2 � October 1, 2003 current land use designation mix so that approximately 80% of the 2,700-acre study area would have the Residential Rural (R-4 zone) land use designation and only±20%of it would continue to have the Residential Single Family (R-8 zone) land use designation. Under this land use scenario there would be an estimated 5,273 fewer average weekday trip ends (AWDTE)than would be generated under the City's current land use designations on the estimated 367 acres of remaining developable land. In terms of their fiscal impacts on the City,Scenario C reflected a more positive cash flow to the City from new development than the other scenarios. This,presumably, is because this lower density(predominantly 4 du/net acre)alternative would result in larger 9,000 plus square foot lots with new housing on them assessed at more than $500,000 per unit. Such housing is consistent with the City's existing residential housing policies, which encourage both a mix and range of housing types and prices in the community. Staff are also recommending that the Commission endorse the development of mandatory community arterial street edge landscaping and buffering standards that would apply eventually along all community arterials*and at least initially, along NE 4"'/SE 128"'Street. These would include planting strips with plant materials such as evergreen trees and hedges, durable decorative fencing, and irrigation systems, sufficient to screen abutting residential development. Staff is also recommending that the Commission endorse the development of optional bonus improvements in specified areas. A density bonus of up to two units per net acre (maximum 6 du/net acre) would be provided for improvements, which would result in higher quality of design and site planning. Such bonus improvements could include: improved landscaping,building design and mix of housing styles; the use of durable building materials such as wood,brick and masonry; and improved unit articulation through the use of modulation, and decorative fenestration and roof forms. Scenario A—Existing Land Use Designations Scenario C—Low Density Urban Designation � . ...._ t _..._ _ _ . ...—T__ _. . . _ _ . .. .. j�_� � �Y ZONES ACRES EXIST.UNRS NEW UNITS :f��J,�/dC $3 � ii-n,Vac. 1SC 45� ' � ` ' R-t Retle � 178 W 0.G9 �4 _.. • ;��. � � 319 � '� ,;.�1'`�`:, R-fi_Vac YI 2d 138 .,��::.. �I R$. .� '�(�'! � ��_ R�S.fte�ev?—�__Z�"_159 �-�;�-,:..,�`',`�^.��-:�t. I �=� .,,,�.:�,.�� - R-8,Vac 2A 198 .. ' ,' ' . �_.. . . , ,.:�.y R �:'.k; 1��..-r �`�' k-e rzen ir zo u .. . �:..�..,_...:., � ,,�..,,��•�-_ . . � ::.::.—.:;' 20BD ' -.s�-;�-:� rorn�se x7 �sz ��,c� ,��.- ,'�r =bL:`�:!;+�'.1 '� ... .. .._ .. .. . . ._._. ;''__ �,�.�'g � i ;. ,. . �•. ' _ . .- .. RF3, ._,.. _ �lOT � ., W.S 367 1`.�2 .. , .. ,. . ....; r. „ . -.....,,. �._� .:.. t ,; ,�... - : _.,,. . , r.,�. '� � � "�=-�`,�.. ;,.�:: �. _ i e ...�.. .� .. ---- �..�: � � ; .� ; ^, , ,.. � . . __ — , :,; � � ;;;" , _ _ ::`, _ ya. :,. -,. .. � _,,� \,y` . ` �� -.. , � ! :: ..; �-- �.�. ``�y _ _ ' .�. °� ;'= �..-.. -�. �n,.--... •. .; - Y ' ` �'`µ . . . �,. , . '1' `� . �� . '_ I �- "' I `- _ .. : - .. �+ � ._.- . - � ' , I'_'."_'� t�;•:. J �`'.... �...�.� F , �i{. :3"_` � �a`� ~'� ,n >- � � 'y� �` v � , ��:!'_. r. . 1e. , ..� I yv � 7� �`IT�`�\``x ' � �w'�_ � _ r �� i) 'V _�� -..0 " • :..: � ' � ��` . � `_ >..i_. ��g��-c� '.M -..._...-... ...��.� z _,� yp.'Y�� i�..�.�...........�...__........�,��l.':�.1+,:1`�C„�`{,.n,._ ._.. 1,_ L YL . ��/ ( .,.v,��.. .,_�...: '� .,.•.r-it � '`� - �� .__..: .:#�_-;�_ .. � . .�ti;:_.-' - , „ --- ,... � `:T - a � -��`� , :, � - - -_- _ _ � „ - ��:. ...�� , . a; -�.—� - � - - . ,i �, �., � .__ . ,.; �'e � �_ .- � ., . : __. . , .:...�.... „ „ .�- 1,Y � ... ._ .- . _ � w.,�_ .._:. � . , . .'v, -�._J � 3 ;t.:r' ' . . -: �--: .'_ ` ,i� , " ,; . :?.._. .:... a' ;; . .. ,� .�. ,,r .. + � .', , ..._r:, n. , , -. : r-...:' .5�.._� _ k-' - ". � . r:;-- , t_.__�__._:, .� . , __,._ . ,��; _ :� _ ., --- (�, _ F : p -. .. � � p ��-° . � . � . ---- � ._ �__. --x.� �� — -- - ._ � s.�., ,-__. --. _.�_ . ^ -- - _.14�R.,.- `��;r.L_�e_.. _.:T.._..I I� �'�.� •' .}_—��._,�� - .�i�_ � ...-: -' '_�,_ "' �] ,r ,�.... �1 j .�.�_�.._.�.y..4 ` .....__ _. '1.. � s� ' �t �n .._.S.�. ' ..' _a.�wp '.� � {�� -...".____.---..___" � - . (� .. _ '_.__ " � : M1-- � i � '�± ' 1 l �F� : ^ ' � ' ' Hr'..• _.i c .. �f" ��y+ `� a.. "i�,�T[�'..' ,� r �i\.. � 1 ( _, _ �.... i�� '_�F �� " 4...fY p ,._.. � -.f.r ��i-� �- � ' . ' .{�u•uw� _�I.F� � ..' .. . i 1 �� i� � { n ' - � �: . .�. �� .4R� ' € ; .....�-.s,-,---� �w� _ _�rti.. . ; , ._�,,, �f '��" ' ,� s.. L �.. _ ��, .� � ��- �- ��...'�y i < _.; ° ,4 _ ..az:�, My�:_ . ..��r.A.��',�_ _ ,' �� ;,'�li�'� ;� °• - ,5 '�' l�.r,.7�.:.:�„�} i' I:,._: .G � :�`s�. `Y��3- -�`.�_F_.1 ��.. � `✓...s:.�=g' :rt�w.c�� ` ; I�� i�-':�' ^'.} i . �_; � �.. ; p �., `.! t , ;�-:-�:�(-fi:;.w.� � � : . � ��`F3 _ -�, - � . ,� �, ,._ ..�`:;,. ';i ,� �,.i � _:,�� .;.�s't, �.,, 3.,;-�r`;� �.�.:L N :; ��t� _ ---,:-- -�f't�Y;..._ � r I '1� -`��:� *�;�::.r....,-.... , ..5�� ,�"';�1 �=.';r?' j' � . ��%y .,�T'� � h.� ` � �.., �,--:". � ...:.;�,:.,� �._,._h �__ _ . .;; - - ; t,.: �; � . � _, er-..�: .: .-_> . - :_. ,t�..,h:,: I , '_t��f.,'.... ,:.T� � �.n-:'��` East � ' ' . u ` .. A. —y,,.,;�_..-,:�.i ...,�,.,r.:,., _...� -=---.....---__.�__.�_._...._�_._ ....__e=,�:.:_. -- __---__,.__......_..__... .... . �..,.�...,,�... Renton Piateau Study Area � 2tNNi a�ou ¢ East Renton Plateau Study Area - �.��,µ� 1 Scenario A-Cur�ent R•5 8 R-8 larnl Use Desi na6ons Scenario C-Low Density Urban(R-4'R-&'R�8) : ',:.,.......,„,,....,....�` 9 ""'."So.�... _ . ��., .�....,._..�. u 2ono a000 • s —_. .:_...._._.. ,.��,.�........,.Uw.....,.-._. 1.>aoon ' ..._.__� t.....m�,. I `*�::v'=..... _ � Sx,- �. —�...... .... , *includes"Principal","Minor",and"Collector"arterials